The Multiverse????

[Mac1958]

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

 

[sealybobo]

1. What the heck has happened to science??

I mean real science, the kind that is based on testable ideas, with real data, reproducible experimental results....i.e., the vaunted Scientific Method?


Prologue;
Since the Enlightenment, the attempt has been made to replace religion with science, and the view that mankind can explain, and, ultimately replace, God and religion. In actuality,the faith and belief that was once invested in religion is now, in the same way and to the same degree, in what we call 'science.'

Whatever comes out of the mouths.....computers.....of scientists is given the same acceptance as was once attributed to the utterances of priests.


You know, there are more working 'scientists' today than the total of all of 'em in earlier times....so, perhaps the glut, the overabundance, has done to intelligent exploration just as the government's working the monetary printing presses overtime has done to the value of money.

Science today suffers from inflation.


How else to explain the nonsense that passes for science today?





2. Case in point: at one time, science endeavored to discover the laws that explain our world, our universe, and how it came into existence. Science, today, seems content to accept every crackpot view with a thoughtful look and sincere stroking of one's chin, as though it actually made sense.



a. "The multiverse (or meta-universe) is the hypothetical set of infinite or finite possible universes (including the historical universe we consistently experience) that together comprise everything that exists and can exist: the entirety of space, time, matter, and energy as well as the physical laws and constants that describe them."
Multiverse - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



3. Brian Greene, "an American theoretical physicist and string theorist. He has been a professor at Columbia University since 1996 and chairman of the World Science Festival since co-founding it in 2008. (Brian Greene - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

"The Hidden Reality is a book by Brian Greene published in 2011 which explores the concept of the multiverse and the possibility of parallel universes. It has been nominated for the Royal Society Winton Prize for Science Books for 2012.
(The Hidden Reality - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

a. From an Amazon review of the book:
"...on the state of post-relativistic physics and cosmology as it is currently accepted by the majority of the academic physics community.
That is just the problem. None of string theory may be true at all. There has been no experimental verification of any of the elements of mathematically based string theory after 30 years or so of work, and, in fact, the theory may not even be "falsifiable." That is, it appears not to be subject to the rigors of the experimental scientific method, although the string theorists hope that with higher energy colliders and the like it may, someday, be testable."
Amazon.com Customer Reviews The Hidden Reality Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos




4. Science today.
Well, OK....'scientists' have to make a living, too. But there are dunces who not only accept this nonsense, but they try to use this kind of ordure as an attack on religion. You can see an interview with Greene about this book, here: Book Discussion Hidden Reality Video C-SPAN.org

Asked to elaborate about the multiverse theory, or about any experimental proof, the professor would say "the math tells us so, and I believe the math." Faith in a new religion.


a. Dr. Berlinski points out the absurdity of using the new religion of 'science' in hypothetical mathematics, and using it to attack religion:

"Quantum cosmology is a branch of mathematical metaphysics that provides no cause for the emergence of the universe, the ‘how,’ nor reason thereof, the ‘why.’ If the mystification induced by its mathematics were removed from the subject, what remains would appear remarkably similar to the various creation myths in which the origin of the universe is attributed to sexual congress between primordial deities."
David Berlinski, "The Devil's Delusion," chapter five.




So.....how many scientists can dance on the head of a pin??

There could be an infinite number of universes. This is more speculative theory than a fact, but several branches of mathematics, quantum mechanics, and astrophysics have all come to similar conclusions: our universe is just one of many and we actually exist in a ‘multiverse’.

There are different ideas of how this could be, one being the concept of atoms only capable of being arranged in a finite number of ways in time and space, ultimately leading to the repetition of events and people.

Other theories propose bubble or parallel universes that hover just out of reach of the dimensions we experience. THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE.

Although these concepts seem like the far-fetched ideas of science-fiction, they are actually proving to be the most elegant solutions to problems thrown up by our discoveries of how the universe works.

I don't know why these possibilities scare you other than they contradict what your religion says. And if that's true, this is why people believe religion is anti science. Anything science that contradicts what religion says is challenged. But the fact is, no amount of science will ever prove god doesn't exist. It will only prove your religions are made up.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. What the heck has happened to science??

I mean real science, the kind that is based on testable ideas, with real data, reproducible experimental results....i.e., the vaunted Scientific Method?


Prologue;
Since the Enlightenment, the attempt has been made to replace religion with science, and the view that mankind can explain, and, ultimately replace, God and religion. In actuality,the faith and belief that was once invested in religion is now, in the same way and to the same degree, in what we call 'science.'

Whatever comes out of the mouths.....computers.....of scientists is given the same acceptance as was once attributed to the utterances of priests.


You know, there are more working 'scientists' today than the total of all of 'em in earlier times....so, perhaps the glut, the overabundance, has done to intelligent exploration just as the government's working the monetary printing presses overtime has done to the value of money.

Science today suffers from inflation.


How else to explain the nonsense that passes for science today?





2. Case in point: at one time, science endeavored to discover the laws that explain our world, our universe, and how it came into existence. Science, today, seems content to accept every crackpot view with a thoughtful look and sincere stroking of one's chin, as though it actually made sense.



a. "The multiverse (or meta-universe) is the hypothetical set of infinite or finite possible universes (including the historical universe we consistently experience) that together comprise everything that exists and can exist: the entirety of space, time, matter, and energy as well as the physical laws and constants that describe them."
Multiverse - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



3. Brian Greene, "an American theoretical physicist and string theorist. He has been a professor at Columbia University since 1996 and chairman of the World Science Festival since co-founding it in 2008. (Brian Greene - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

"The Hidden Reality is a book by Brian Greene published in 2011 which explores the concept of the multiverse and the possibility of parallel universes. It has been nominated for the Royal Society Winton Prize for Science Books for 2012.
(The Hidden Reality - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

a. From an Amazon review of the book:
"...on the state of post-relativistic physics and cosmology as it is currently accepted by the majority of the academic physics community.
That is just the problem. None of string theory may be true at all. There has been no experimental verification of any of the elements of mathematically based string theory after 30 years or so of work, and, in fact, the theory may not even be "falsifiable." That is, it appears not to be subject to the rigors of the experimental scientific method, although the string theorists hope that with higher energy colliders and the like it may, someday, be testable."
Amazon.com Customer Reviews The Hidden Reality Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos




4. Science today.
Well, OK....'scientists' have to make a living, too. But there are dunces who not only accept this nonsense, but they try to use this kind of ordure as an attack on religion. You can see an interview with Greene about this book, here: Book Discussion Hidden Reality Video C-SPAN.org

Asked to elaborate about the multiverse theory, or about any experimental proof, the professor would say "the math tells us so, and I believe the math." Faith in a new religion.


a. Dr. Berlinski points out the absurdity of using the new religion of 'science' in hypothetical mathematics, and using it to attack religion:

"Quantum cosmology is a branch of mathematical metaphysics that provides no cause for the emergence of the universe, the ‘how,’ nor reason thereof, the ‘why.’ If the mystification induced by its mathematics were removed from the subject, what remains would appear remarkably similar to the various creation myths in which the origin of the universe is attributed to sexual congress between primordial deities."
David Berlinski, "The Devil's Delusion," chapter five.




So.....how many scientists can dance on the head of a pin??

There could be an infinite number of universes. This is more speculative theory than a fact, but several branches of mathematics, quantum mechanics, and astrophysics have all come to similar conclusions: our universe is just one of many and we actually exist in a ‘multiverse’.

There are different ideas of how this could be, one being the concept of atoms only capable of being arranged in a finite number of ways in time and space, ultimately leading to the repetition of events and people.

Other theories propose bubble or parallel universes that hover just out of reach of the dimensions we experience. THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE.

Although these concepts seem like the far-fetched ideas of science-fiction, they are actually proving to be the most elegant solutions to problems thrown up by our discoveries of how the universe works.

I don't know why these possibilities scare you other than they contradict what your religion says. And if that's true, this is why people believe religion is anti science. Anything science that contradicts what religion says is challenged. But the fact is, no amount of science will ever prove god doesn't exist. It will only prove your religions are made up.

"There could be an infinite number of universes."

What a perfect example of the deterioration of science understanding and the ascendancy of government schooling.

What the evidence for that absurdity that surpasses evidence for these equally sophomoric pronouncements?

The moon may be made of green cheese.
The universe was formed out of nothing.
Unicorns exist.
If the oceans rise, human beings will develop gills.
You may develop an actual understanding of that 'knowledge' is?


Evidence, please.

 

[PoliticalChic]

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

 

[sealybobo]

1. What the heck has happened to science??

I mean real science, the kind that is based on testable ideas, with real data, reproducible experimental results....i.e., the vaunted Scientific Method?


Prologue;
Since the Enlightenment, the attempt has been made to replace religion with science, and the view that mankind can explain, and, ultimately replace, God and religion. In actuality,the faith and belief that was once invested in religion is now, in the same way and to the same degree, in what we call 'science.'

Whatever comes out of the mouths.....computers.....of scientists is given the same acceptance as was once attributed to the utterances of priests.


You know, there are more working 'scientists' today than the total of all of 'em in earlier times....so, perhaps the glut, the overabundance, has done to intelligent exploration just as the government's working the monetary printing presses overtime has done to the value of money.

Science today suffers from inflation.


How else to explain the nonsense that passes for science today?





2. Case in point: at one time, science endeavored to discover the laws that explain our world, our universe, and how it came into existence. Science, today, seems content to accept every crackpot view with a thoughtful look and sincere stroking of one's chin, as though it actually made sense.



a. "The multiverse (or meta-universe) is the hypothetical set of infinite or finite possible universes (including the historical universe we consistently experience) that together comprise everything that exists and can exist: the entirety of space, time, matter, and energy as well as the physical laws and constants that describe them."
Multiverse - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



3. Brian Greene, "an American theoretical physicist and string theorist. He has been a professor at Columbia University since 1996 and chairman of the World Science Festival since co-founding it in 2008. (Brian Greene - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

"The Hidden Reality is a book by Brian Greene published in 2011 which explores the concept of the multiverse and the possibility of parallel universes. It has been nominated for the Royal Society Winton Prize for Science Books for 2012.
(The Hidden Reality - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

a. From an Amazon review of the book:
"...on the state of post-relativistic physics and cosmology as it is currently accepted by the majority of the academic physics community.
That is just the problem. None of string theory may be true at all. There has been no experimental verification of any of the elements of mathematically based string theory after 30 years or so of work, and, in fact, the theory may not even be "falsifiable." That is, it appears not to be subject to the rigors of the experimental scientific method, although the string theorists hope that with higher energy colliders and the like it may, someday, be testable."
Amazon.com Customer Reviews The Hidden Reality Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos




4. Science today.
Well, OK....'scientists' have to make a living, too. But there are dunces who not only accept this nonsense, but they try to use this kind of ordure as an attack on religion. You can see an interview with Greene about this book, here: Book Discussion Hidden Reality Video C-SPAN.org

Asked to elaborate about the multiverse theory, or about any experimental proof, the professor would say "the math tells us so, and I believe the math." Faith in a new religion.


a. Dr. Berlinski points out the absurdity of using the new religion of 'science' in hypothetical mathematics, and using it to attack religion:

"Quantum cosmology is a branch of mathematical metaphysics that provides no cause for the emergence of the universe, the ‘how,’ nor reason thereof, the ‘why.’ If the mystification induced by its mathematics were removed from the subject, what remains would appear remarkably similar to the various creation myths in which the origin of the universe is attributed to sexual congress between primordial deities."
David Berlinski, "The Devil's Delusion," chapter five.




So.....how many scientists can dance on the head of a pin??

There could be an infinite number of universes. This is more speculative theory than a fact, but several branches of mathematics, quantum mechanics, and astrophysics have all come to similar conclusions: our universe is just one of many and we actually exist in a ‘multiverse’.

There are different ideas of how this could be, one being the concept of atoms only capable of being arranged in a finite number of ways in time and space, ultimately leading to the repetition of events and people.

Other theories propose bubble or parallel universes that hover just out of reach of the dimensions we experience. THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE.

Although these concepts seem like the far-fetched ideas of science-fiction, they are actually proving to be the most elegant solutions to problems thrown up by our discoveries of how the universe works.

I don't know why these possibilities scare you other than they contradict what your religion says. And if that's true, this is why people believe religion is anti science. Anything science that contradicts what religion says is challenged. But the fact is, no amount of science will ever prove god doesn't exist. It will only prove your religions are made up.

"There could be an infinite number of universes."

What a perfect example of the deterioration of science understanding and the ascendancy of government schooling.

What the evidence for that absurdity that surpasses evidence for these equally sophomoric pronouncements?

The moon may be made of green cheese.
The universe was formed out of nothing.
Unicorns exist.
If the oceans rise, human beings will develop gills.
You may develop an actual understanding of that 'knowledge' is?


Evidence, please.

This is more speculative theory than a fact, but several branches of mathematics, quantum mechanics, and astrophysics have all come to similar conclusions: our universe is just one of many and we actually exist in a ‘multiverse’.

At least they admit it. Why do you doubt it so strongly? Does it contradict what your religion says? How? And if this is the source of your objection, please provide us evidence of your religions theory.

Why do you have a problem with an infinite number of universes? Makes perfect sense to me.

Which universe do we live in?

 

[sealybobo]

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

I can tell you when the first new species of higher life was produced. In the last few days of the year of the cosmic calendar.

December 25th.

You seem to not realize that the reason we can't answer some of your questions is that we just don't know. You claim to know. You keep asking questions suggesting you don't understand evolution.

 

[sealybobo]

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

There was no first human

There was no first human

 

[sealybobo]

1. What the heck has happened to science??

I mean real science, the kind that is based on testable ideas, with real data, reproducible experimental results....i.e., the vaunted Scientific Method?


Prologue;
Since the Enlightenment, the attempt has been made to replace religion with science, and the view that mankind can explain, and, ultimately replace, God and religion. In actuality,the faith and belief that was once invested in religion is now, in the same way and to the same degree, in what we call 'science.'

Whatever comes out of the mouths.....computers.....of scientists is given the same acceptance as was once attributed to the utterances of priests.


You know, there are more working 'scientists' today than the total of all of 'em in earlier times....so, perhaps the glut, the overabundance, has done to intelligent exploration just as the government's working the monetary printing presses overtime has done to the value of money.

Science today suffers from inflation.


How else to explain the nonsense that passes for science today?





2. Case in point: at one time, science endeavored to discover the laws that explain our world, our universe, and how it came into existence. Science, today, seems content to accept every crackpot view with a thoughtful look and sincere stroking of one's chin, as though it actually made sense.



a. "The multiverse (or meta-universe) is the hypothetical set of infinite or finite possible universes (including the historical universe we consistently experience) that together comprise everything that exists and can exist: the entirety of space, time, matter, and energy as well as the physical laws and constants that describe them."
Multiverse - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



3. Brian Greene, "an American theoretical physicist and string theorist. He has been a professor at Columbia University since 1996 and chairman of the World Science Festival since co-founding it in 2008. (Brian Greene - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

"The Hidden Reality is a book by Brian Greene published in 2011 which explores the concept of the multiverse and the possibility of parallel universes. It has been nominated for the Royal Society Winton Prize for Science Books for 2012.
(The Hidden Reality - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

a. From an Amazon review of the book:
"...on the state of post-relativistic physics and cosmology as it is currently accepted by the majority of the academic physics community.
That is just the problem. None of string theory may be true at all. There has been no experimental verification of any of the elements of mathematically based string theory after 30 years or so of work, and, in fact, the theory may not even be "falsifiable." That is, it appears not to be subject to the rigors of the experimental scientific method, although the string theorists hope that with higher energy colliders and the like it may, someday, be testable."
Amazon.com Customer Reviews The Hidden Reality Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos




4. Science today.
Well, OK....'scientists' have to make a living, too. But there are dunces who not only accept this nonsense, but they try to use this kind of ordure as an attack on religion. You can see an interview with Greene about this book, here: Book Discussion Hidden Reality Video C-SPAN.org

Asked to elaborate about the multiverse theory, or about any experimental proof, the professor would say "the math tells us so, and I believe the math." Faith in a new religion.


a. Dr. Berlinski points out the absurdity of using the new religion of 'science' in hypothetical mathematics, and using it to attack religion:

"Quantum cosmology is a branch of mathematical metaphysics that provides no cause for the emergence of the universe, the ‘how,’ nor reason thereof, the ‘why.’ If the mystification induced by its mathematics were removed from the subject, what remains would appear remarkably similar to the various creation myths in which the origin of the universe is attributed to sexual congress between primordial deities."
David Berlinski, "The Devil's Delusion," chapter five.




So.....how many scientists can dance on the head of a pin??

The cosmos is everything in and beyond our universe. Can you imagine an infinite cosmos? See I dont say universe because we are just a pea or grain of sand in our entire universe because it is huge. But its only 13 billion years old. And it will only last about another 100 billion years. But eventually every star in our universe will die. So what? What about all the other universes being born every day a google distance from our universe or the universe beyond that? An infinite distance. Unimaginable unthinkable but probable. Were in a big lava lamp.

So sad that you are clueless to the fact that your well-composed post has nothing....absolutely nothing to do with my OP...the one to which you linked and, supposedly, responding to.


Maybe a nice poem next time?

Thanks for dropping by.

The major issue here is that your posts have nothing to do with science for obvious reasons.

I agree. Their motivation is desperation. Scientists are not on the run. The religists are. Threads like this are the verbal IEDs left in the road of information attempting to prove these people are good little religists that will say just about anything to keep their one sided debate alive. Their cause is lost and only those blinded by snake oil salesmen persist. All they have to offer has been disproved and reduced to myth.

Notice something? No scientists are on this debate. There is nothing for them to defend. The facts are clear and no amount of name calling can change them.

And keep in mind you could convince them that multiple universes could exist, in fact you could prove to them that they do exist and all they would say is

 

[Mac1958]

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

The beauty of science (well, one of its beauties) is that it is full of curiosity and observation and experimentation and innovation.

Science doesn't claim to have The Answer To Our Very Existence. It has to be humble, it has no such ego.

Unlike religion. And hardcore partisan ideology.
.

 

[sealybobo]

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

The beauty of science (well, one of its beauties) is that it is full of curiosity and observation and experimentation and innovation.

Science doesn't claim to have The Answer To Our Very Existence. It has to be humble, it has no such ego.

Unlike religion. And hardcore partisan ideology.
.

The material from a supernova eventually disperses throughout interstellar space. The oldest stars almost exclusively consisted of hydrogen and helium, with oxygen and the rest of the heavy elements in the universe later coming from supernova explosions. We know that stars make heavy elements, and late in their lives, they eject gas into the medium between stars so it can be part of subsequent stars and planets (and people).

So, all life on Earth and the atoms in our bodies were created in the furnace of now-long-dead stars.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. What the heck has happened to science??

I mean real science, the kind that is based on testable ideas, with real data, reproducible experimental results....i.e., the vaunted Scientific Method?


Prologue;
Since the Enlightenment, the attempt has been made to replace religion with science, and the view that mankind can explain, and, ultimately replace, God and religion. In actuality,the faith and belief that was once invested in religion is now, in the same way and to the same degree, in what we call 'science.'

Whatever comes out of the mouths.....computers.....of scientists is given the same acceptance as was once attributed to the utterances of priests.


You know, there are more working 'scientists' today than the total of all of 'em in earlier times....so, perhaps the glut, the overabundance, has done to intelligent exploration just as the government's working the monetary printing presses overtime has done to the value of money.

Science today suffers from inflation.


How else to explain the nonsense that passes for science today?





2. Case in point: at one time, science endeavored to discover the laws that explain our world, our universe, and how it came into existence. Science, today, seems content to accept every crackpot view with a thoughtful look and sincere stroking of one's chin, as though it actually made sense.



a. "The multiverse (or meta-universe) is the hypothetical set of infinite or finite possible universes (including the historical universe we consistently experience) that together comprise everything that exists and can exist: the entirety of space, time, matter, and energy as well as the physical laws and constants that describe them."
Multiverse - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



3. Brian Greene, "an American theoretical physicist and string theorist. He has been a professor at Columbia University since 1996 and chairman of the World Science Festival since co-founding it in 2008. (Brian Greene - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

"The Hidden Reality is a book by Brian Greene published in 2011 which explores the concept of the multiverse and the possibility of parallel universes. It has been nominated for the Royal Society Winton Prize for Science Books for 2012.
(The Hidden Reality - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

a. From an Amazon review of the book:
"...on the state of post-relativistic physics and cosmology as it is currently accepted by the majority of the academic physics community.
That is just the problem. None of string theory may be true at all. There has been no experimental verification of any of the elements of mathematically based string theory after 30 years or so of work, and, in fact, the theory may not even be "falsifiable." That is, it appears not to be subject to the rigors of the experimental scientific method, although the string theorists hope that with higher energy colliders and the like it may, someday, be testable."
Amazon.com Customer Reviews The Hidden Reality Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos




4. Science today.
Well, OK....'scientists' have to make a living, too. But there are dunces who not only accept this nonsense, but they try to use this kind of ordure as an attack on religion. You can see an interview with Greene about this book, here: Book Discussion Hidden Reality Video C-SPAN.org

Asked to elaborate about the multiverse theory, or about any experimental proof, the professor would say "the math tells us so, and I believe the math." Faith in a new religion.


a. Dr. Berlinski points out the absurdity of using the new religion of 'science' in hypothetical mathematics, and using it to attack religion:

"Quantum cosmology is a branch of mathematical metaphysics that provides no cause for the emergence of the universe, the ‘how,’ nor reason thereof, the ‘why.’ If the mystification induced by its mathematics were removed from the subject, what remains would appear remarkably similar to the various creation myths in which the origin of the universe is attributed to sexual congress between primordial deities."
David Berlinski, "The Devil's Delusion," chapter five.




So.....how many scientists can dance on the head of a pin??

There could be an infinite number of universes. This is more speculative theory than a fact, but several branches of mathematics, quantum mechanics, and astrophysics have all come to similar conclusions: our universe is just one of many and we actually exist in a ‘multiverse’.

There are different ideas of how this could be, one being the concept of atoms only capable of being arranged in a finite number of ways in time and space, ultimately leading to the repetition of events and people.

Other theories propose bubble or parallel universes that hover just out of reach of the dimensions we experience. THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE.

Although these concepts seem like the far-fetched ideas of science-fiction, they are actually proving to be the most elegant solutions to problems thrown up by our discoveries of how the universe works.

I don't know why these possibilities scare you other than they contradict what your religion says. And if that's true, this is why people believe religion is anti science. Anything science that contradicts what religion says is challenged. But the fact is, no amount of science will ever prove god doesn't exist. It will only prove your religions are made up.

"There could be an infinite number of universes."

What a perfect example of the deterioration of science understanding and the ascendancy of government schooling.

What the evidence for that absurdity that surpasses evidence for these equally sophomoric pronouncements?

The moon may be made of green cheese.
The universe was formed out of nothing.
Unicorns exist.
If the oceans rise, human beings will develop gills.
You may develop an actual understanding of that 'knowledge' is?


Evidence, please.

This is more speculative theory than a fact, but several branches of mathematics, quantum mechanics, and astrophysics have all come to similar conclusions: our universe is just one of many and we actually exist in a ‘multiverse’.

At least they admit it. Why do you doubt it so strongly? Does it contradict what your religion says? How? And if this is the source of your objection, please provide us evidence of your religions theory.

Why do you have a problem with an infinite number of universes? Makes perfect sense to me.

Which universe do we live in?

"....speculative theory...."

Sort of like this?
The moon may be made of green cheese.
The universe was formed out of nothing.
Unicorns exist.
If the oceans rise, human beings will develop gills.
You may develop an actual understanding of that 'knowledge' is?

 

[PoliticalChic]

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

I can tell you when the first new species of higher life was produced. In the last few days of the year of the cosmic calendar.

December 25th.

You seem to not realize that the reason we can't answer some of your questions is that we just don't know. You claim to know. You keep asking questions suggesting you don't understand evolution.

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

I can tell you when the first new species of higher life was produced. In the last few days of the year of the cosmic calendar.

December 25th.

You seem to not realize that the reason we can't answer some of your questions is that we just don't know. You claim to know. You keep asking questions suggesting you don't understand evolution.

"You keep asking questions suggesting you don't understand evolution."
Really?

Well...then, why don't you take a shot at this query?

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?

 

[PoliticalChic]

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

The beauty of science (well, one of its beauties) is that it is full of curiosity and observation and experimentation and innovation.

Science doesn't claim to have The Answer To Our Very Existence. It has to be humble, it has no such ego.

Unlike religion. And hardcore partisan ideology.
.

I have no doubt that there are many and fundamental reasons for you to be humble, fency.

 

[Mac1958]

I have no doubt that there are many and fundamental reasons for you to be humble, fency.

Thank you.

Ironically, as I understand it, Christians are supposed to be humble also.

I don't see much of that around here.
.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I have no doubt that there are many and fundamental reasons for you to be humble, fency.

Thank you.

Ironically, as I understand it, Christians are supposed to be humble also.

I don't see much of that around here.
.

Now...why would you go there?

Could it be to avoid this?
It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?

 

[sealybobo]

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

I can tell you when the first new species of higher life was produced. In the last few days of the year of the cosmic calendar.

December 25th.

You seem to not realize that the reason we can't answer some of your questions is that we just don't know. You claim to know. You keep asking questions suggesting you don't understand evolution.

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

I can tell you when the first new species of higher life was produced. In the last few days of the year of the cosmic calendar.

December 25th.

You seem to not realize that the reason we can't answer some of your questions is that we just don't know. You claim to know. You keep asking questions suggesting you don't understand evolution.

"You keep asking questions suggesting you don't understand evolution."
Really?

Well...then, why don't you take a shot at this query?

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?

Clearly you didn't watch the video
There was no first human

a short video explaining to non-scientists why there was no first human.

If you go back far enough. trace your fathers all the way back to your first father (and mother of course), we know that modern humans came from Mesolithic man. Mesolithic man came from Paleolithic man. Then Homo Erectus. But 25 millions of years ago we were more like monkeys, then before that squirrels. Before that we came from Hylonomus. That was more like a reptile.

Point is there was no first human. Paleolithic man eventually evolved into Mesolithic man. It didn't just happen one day.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. What the heck has happened to science??

I mean real science, the kind that is based on testable ideas, with real data, reproducible experimental results....i.e., the vaunted Scientific Method?


Prologue;
Since the Enlightenment, the attempt has been made to replace religion with science, and the view that mankind can explain, and, ultimately replace, God and religion. In actuality,the faith and belief that was once invested in religion is now, in the same way and to the same degree, in what we call 'science.'

Whatever comes out of the mouths.....computers.....of scientists is given the same acceptance as was once attributed to the utterances of priests.


You know, there are more working 'scientists' today than the total of all of 'em in earlier times....so, perhaps the glut, the overabundance, has done to intelligent exploration just as the government's working the monetary printing presses overtime has done to the value of money.

Science today suffers from inflation.


How else to explain the nonsense that passes for science today?





2. Case in point: at one time, science endeavored to discover the laws that explain our world, our universe, and how it came into existence. Science, today, seems content to accept every crackpot view with a thoughtful look and sincere stroking of one's chin, as though it actually made sense.



a. "The multiverse (or meta-universe) is the hypothetical set of infinite or finite possible universes (including the historical universe we consistently experience) that together comprise everything that exists and can exist: the entirety of space, time, matter, and energy as well as the physical laws and constants that describe them."
Multiverse - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



3. Brian Greene, "an American theoretical physicist and string theorist. He has been a professor at Columbia University since 1996 and chairman of the World Science Festival since co-founding it in 2008. (Brian Greene - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

"The Hidden Reality is a book by Brian Greene published in 2011 which explores the concept of the multiverse and the possibility of parallel universes. It has been nominated for the Royal Society Winton Prize for Science Books for 2012.
(The Hidden Reality - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia"

a. From an Amazon review of the book:
"...on the state of post-relativistic physics and cosmology as it is currently accepted by the majority of the academic physics community.
That is just the problem. None of string theory may be true at all. There has been no experimental verification of any of the elements of mathematically based string theory after 30 years or so of work, and, in fact, the theory may not even be "falsifiable." That is, it appears not to be subject to the rigors of the experimental scientific method, although the string theorists hope that with higher energy colliders and the like it may, someday, be testable."
Amazon.com Customer Reviews The Hidden Reality Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos




4. Science today.
Well, OK....'scientists' have to make a living, too. But there are dunces who not only accept this nonsense, but they try to use this kind of ordure as an attack on religion. You can see an interview with Greene about this book, here: Book Discussion Hidden Reality Video C-SPAN.org

Asked to elaborate about the multiverse theory, or about any experimental proof, the professor would say "the math tells us so, and I believe the math." Faith in a new religion.


a. Dr. Berlinski points out the absurdity of using the new religion of 'science' in hypothetical mathematics, and using it to attack religion:

"Quantum cosmology is a branch of mathematical metaphysics that provides no cause for the emergence of the universe, the ‘how,’ nor reason thereof, the ‘why.’ If the mystification induced by its mathematics were removed from the subject, what remains would appear remarkably similar to the various creation myths in which the origin of the universe is attributed to sexual congress between primordial deities."
David Berlinski, "The Devil's Delusion," chapter five.




So.....how many scientists can dance on the head of a pin??

There could be an infinite number of universes. This is more speculative theory than a fact, but several branches of mathematics, quantum mechanics, and astrophysics have all come to similar conclusions: our universe is just one of many and we actually exist in a ‘multiverse’.

There are different ideas of how this could be, one being the concept of atoms only capable of being arranged in a finite number of ways in time and space, ultimately leading to the repetition of events and people.

Other theories propose bubble or parallel universes that hover just out of reach of the dimensions we experience. THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE.

Although these concepts seem like the far-fetched ideas of science-fiction, they are actually proving to be the most elegant solutions to problems thrown up by our discoveries of how the universe works.

I don't know why these possibilities scare you other than they contradict what your religion says. And if that's true, this is why people believe religion is anti science. Anything science that contradicts what religion says is challenged. But the fact is, no amount of science will ever prove god doesn't exist. It will only prove your religions are made up.

"There could be an infinite number of universes."

What a perfect example of the deterioration of science understanding and the ascendancy of government schooling.

What the evidence for that absurdity that surpasses evidence for these equally sophomoric pronouncements?

The moon may be made of green cheese.
The universe was formed out of nothing.
Unicorns exist.
If the oceans rise, human beings will develop gills.
You may develop an actual understanding of that 'knowledge' is?


Evidence, please.

This is more speculative theory than a fact, but several branches of mathematics, quantum mechanics, and astrophysics have all come to similar conclusions: our universe is just one of many and we actually exist in a ‘multiverse’.

At least they admit it. Why do you doubt it so strongly? Does it contradict what your religion says? How? And if this is the source of your objection, please provide us evidence of your religions theory.

Why do you have a problem with an infinite number of universes? Makes perfect sense to me.

Which universe do we live in?

".... but several branches of mathematics, quantum mechanics, and astrophysics have all come to similar conclusions: our universe is just one of many and we actually exist in a ‘multiverse’."

Hardly.

While a religious individual would look atthe fact that the parameters of the world are exactly what a Creator would have provided for us,scientific atheists, such as Brian Greene, say that the existence of one planet with such parameters suggests that there are other places with variations on these conditions and laws, i.e., the multiverse theory.
Does it?

Is there any such evidence?

That is the key to it being 'science,' isn't it? Evidence, testable in the lab, predictive in nature.....
Conjecture is not science....even if you hid it behind imaginary mathematics, you know, to fool the easily led.



"[Richard] Dawkins [outspoken atheist and author of 'The God Delusion], among others, has embraced the ‘multiverse,’ [the Landscape] idea, that there could be an infinite number of universes, each with some permutation of the natural laws of physics, vastly different from ours.

Why, then, scruple at the Deity? After all, the theologian need only apply to a single God and a single universe.Dawkins must appeal to infinitely many universes crammed with laws of nature wriggling indiscreetly and fundamental physical parameters changing as one travels the cosmos.And- the entire gargantuan structurescientifically unobservable and devoid of any connection to experience.

Now, get this: Dawkins actually writes, “The key difference between the radically extravagant God hypothesis and the apparently extravagant multiverse hypothesis, is one of statistical improbability.”
Berlinski, "The Devil's Delusion," chapter 7

 

[PoliticalChic]

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

I can tell you when the first new species of higher life was produced. In the last few days of the year of the cosmic calendar.

December 25th.

You seem to not realize that the reason we can't answer some of your questions is that we just don't know. You claim to know. You keep asking questions suggesting you don't understand evolution.

.

The various religions of the world say (and have always said) that they have The Answer, which is what is written in their books and practiced in their traditions.

Science willfully, happily, gleefully admits that it's just scratching the surface, that we're curious and learning more all the time, and still have a long, long way to go.

Comparing the two is apples and oranges.

,

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?


Or are you one of the acolytes of the new religion known as 'science'?

I can tell you when the first new species of higher life was produced. In the last few days of the year of the cosmic calendar.

December 25th.

You seem to not realize that the reason we can't answer some of your questions is that we just don't know. You claim to know. You keep asking questions suggesting you don't understand evolution.

"You keep asking questions suggesting you don't understand evolution."
Really?

Well...then, why don't you take a shot at this query?

It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?

Clearly you didn't watch the video
There was no first human

a short video explaining to non-scientists why there was no first human.

If you go back far enough. trace your fathers all the way back to your first father (and mother of course), we know that modern humans came from Mesolithic man. Mesolithic man came from Paleolithic man. Then Homo Erectus. But 25 millions of years ago we were more like monkeys, then before that squirrels. Before that we came from Hylonomus. That was more like a reptile.

Point is there was no first human. Paleolithic man eventually evolved into Mesolithic man. It didn't just happen one day.

I don't believe I referred to any 'first human.'

Why would you?

 

[Mac1958]

I have no doubt that there are many and fundamental reasons for you to be humble, fency.

Thank you.

Ironically, as I understand it, Christians are supposed to be humble also.

I don't see much of that around here.
.

Now...why would you go there?

Could it be to avoid this?
It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?

Sure don't.

Someone may.

Why is this so important?
.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I have no doubt that there are many and fundamental reasons for you to be humble, fency.

Thank you.

Ironically, as I understand it, Christians are supposed to be humble also.

I don't see much of that around here.
.

Now...why would you go there?

Could it be to avoid this?
It's been over a century and a half since Darwin advanced his theory of evolution...and, with more 'scientists' at work today than the cumulative total of same for all of history before.....

....do you have a timetable for when the first new species of higher life will be produced?

Sure don't.

Someone may.

Why is this so important?
.

"Why is this so important?"

Because it suggests that Darwin's theory is incorrect as an explanation for the diversity of life on our planet.

And....if you had the courage to rock the boat, it might cause you to question why Darwin's theory is taught in government schools as the nearest thing to fact.

And...if you really wanted to live dangerously....you might wonder why this practice is so very important to the powers in our society.