Quantum Physics vs. Religion??

[edthecynic]

" …according to various calculations, if the values of some of the fundamental parameters of our universe were a little larger or a little smaller, life could not have arisen.!

What a load of baloney! Life would simply be different.

 

[edthecynic]

You dunce....there was no law of physics that applies before the Big Bang.

None.

And no energy, nor matter.

If that were true there would be no energy now.

Au contraire.

It is true....and that means your lack of understanding is on display.

Again, it is a proven fact that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Nothing you have claimed has been even observed let alone proven.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You dunce....there was no law of physics that applies before the Big Bang.

None.

And no energy, nor matter.

If that were true there would be no energy now.

Au contraire.

It is true....and that means your lack of understanding is on display.

Again, it is a proven fact that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Nothing you have claimed has been even observed let alone proven.

As you were unable to understand it the first time.....I see no reason for you to understand it now.

Dismissed.

 

[edthecynic]

You dunce....there was no law of physics that applies before the Big Bang.

None.

And no energy, nor matter.

If that were true there would be no energy now.

Au contraire.

It is true....and that means your lack of understanding is on display.

Again, it is a proven fact that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Nothing you have claimed has been even observed let alone proven.

As you were unable to understand it the first time.....I see no reason for you to understand it now.

Dismissed.

Conjecture does not trump proof.
You got nothing.

 

[Hollie]

You dunce....there was no law of physics that applies before the Big Bang.

None.

And no energy, nor matter.

If that were true there would be no energy now.

Au contraire.

It is true....and that means your lack of understanding is on display.

Again, it is a proven fact that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Nothing you have claimed has been even observed let alone proven.

As you were unable to understand it the first time.....I see no reason for you to understand it now.

Dismissed.

How typical. You're befuddled, you can't find find any "quotes" to edit, parse then cut and paste so you resort to acting like a petulant child.

 

[PoliticalChic]

12. Something else that is interesting scientific atheists use this argument...

"God could not be a hidden causal structure, since God is not at all physical or subject to any causal laws, which belong only to created universes.... That is basically why God is not, and could not be, part of a strictly scientific explanation. God is not publicly observable, is not subject to experiment, does not act in accordance with mathematically describable regularities, and God’s acts cannot be predicted in measurable or testable ways. " The New Atheism International Society for Science Religion

So.....those are the reasons that God cannot be allowed as an explanation for any unexplained phenomena....

Agreed?


Now, watch what has come from quantum theory: the Multiverse.

"…some of the world’s premier physicists to propose that our universe is only one of an enormous number of universes with wildly varying properties, and that some of the most basic features of our particular universe are indeed mere accidents—a random throw of the cosmic dice. In which case, there is no hope of ever explaining our universe’s features in terms of fundamental causes and principles….If the multiverse idea is correct, then the historic mission of physics to explain all the properties of our universe in terms of fundamental principles—to explain why the properties of our universe must necessarily be what they are—is futile, a beautiful philosophical dream that simply isn’t true." http://www.harpers.org/archive/2011/12/0083720


The reason that this 'multiverse' concept is so very important to "some of the world’s premier [atheist] physicists" is that they cannot explain why our universe seems so finely-tuned to accommodate human life.
It tends to suggest some....'intelligence...'
Dr. Lightman writes:
"...…the great question, of course, is why these fundamental parameters happen to lie within the range needed for life. Does the universe care about life? Intelligent design is one answer."
Lightman, Op.Cit.


So....these 'scientists' came up with the fairy tale that we just happen to get the laws that worked out for us.....and other places have every other 'accidental' set of laws of physics.




Get that? " ...some of the world’s premier physicists to propose" that the laws of physics that apply here, don't in some other universe.




But they said God was out of the question because "... not publicly observable, is not subject to experiment, does not act in accordance with mathematically describable regularities, and ... acts cannot be predicted in measurable or testable ways. "


Bottom line: it is not science that objects to and attacks religion....there is something else going on here.
(Don't be afraid to ask what that is.)

 

[Hollie]

12. Something else that is interesting scientific atheists use this argument...

"God could not be a hidden causal structure, since God is not at all physical or subject to any causal laws, which belong only to created universes.... That is basically why God is not, and could not be, part of a strictly scientific explanation. God is not publicly observable, is not subject to experiment, does not act in accordance with mathematically describable regularities, and God’s acts cannot be predicted in measurable or testable ways. " The New Atheism International Society for Science Religion

So.....those are the reasons that God cannot be allowed as an explanation for any unexplained phenomena....

Agreed?


Now, watch what has come from quantum theory: the Multiverse.

"…some of the world’s premier physicists to propose that our universe is only one of an enormous number of universes with wildly varying properties, and that some of the most basic features of our particular universe are indeed mere accidents—a random throw of the cosmic dice. In which case, there is no hope of ever explaining our universe’s features in terms of fundamental causes and principles….If the multiverse idea is correct, then the historic mission of physics to explain all the properties of our universe in terms of fundamental principles—to explain why the properties of our universe must necessarily be what they are—is futile, a beautiful philosophical dream that simply isn’t true." http://www.harpers.org/archive/2011/12/0083720


The reason that this 'multiverse' concept is so very important to "some of the world’s premier [atheist] physicists" is that they cannot explain why our universe seems so finely-tuned to accommodate human life.
It tends to suggest some....'intelligence...'
Dr. Lightman writes:
"...…the great question, of course, is why these fundamental parameters happen to lie within the range needed for life. Does the universe care about life? Intelligent design is one answer."
Lightman, Op.Cit.


So....these 'scientists' came up with the fairy tale that we just happen to get the laws that worked out for us.....and other places have every other 'accidental' set of laws of physics.




Get that? " ...some of the world’s premier physicists to propose" that the laws of physics that apply here, don't in some other universe.




But they said God was out of the question because "... not publicly observable, is not subject to experiment, does not act in accordance with mathematically describable regularities, and ... acts cannot be predicted in measurable or testable ways. "


Bottom line: it is not science that objects to and attacks religion....there is something else going on here.
(Don't be afraid to ask what that is.)

It's a conspiracy! Call Benny Hinn. He'll fill you in on the details.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

The understanding of the Big Bang is that there was nothing before it....not even time!

Update your bookmarks. Latest cosmological theory suggest there was something before. As is also sensible.

Gravitational Waves Reveal the Universe before the Big Bang: An Interview with Physicist Gabriele Veneziano April 3, 2014
Gravitational Waves Reveal the Universe before the Big Bang An Interview with Physicist Gabriele Veneziano Critical Opalescence Scientific American Blog Network

"It’s not usually put like this, but the discovery of primordial gravitational waves two weeks ago has given us our first direct glimpse of a period before the big bang. The term “big bang” is sometimes taken to mean the beginning of the universe, and that’s the impression you get from diagrams such as the one at left, which the BICEP2 team showed during the press conference announcing its discovery. But cosmologists don’t know whether the universe had a beginning. The term “big bang” really refers to the beginning of the universe as we know it—that is, an expanding universe filled with matter that has cooled and coagulated into galaxies. Cosmic inflation, the process the BICEP2 results appear to have vindicated, occurred before the big bang by this definition. The universe during inflation was a deeply alien place, devoid of matter, governed by primeval ur-forces, and thoroughly quantum."

 

[PoliticalChic]

The understanding of the Big Bang is that there was nothing before it....not even time!

Update your bookmarks. Latest cosmological theory suggest there was something before. As is also sensible.

Gravitational Waves Reveal the Universe before the Big Bang: An Interview with Physicist Gabriele Veneziano April 3, 2014
Gravitational Waves Reveal the Universe before the Big Bang An Interview with Physicist Gabriele Veneziano Critical Opalescence Scientific American Blog Network

"It’s not usually put like this, but the discovery of primordial gravitational waves two weeks ago has given us our first direct glimpse of a period before the big bang. The term “big bang” is sometimes taken to mean the beginning of the universe, and that’s the impression you get from diagrams such as the one at left, which the BICEP2 team showed during the press conference announcing its discovery. But cosmologists don’t know whether the universe had a beginning. The term “big bang” really refers to the beginning of the universe as we know it—that is, an expanding universe filled with matter that has cooled and coagulated into galaxies. Cosmic inflation, the process the BICEP2 results appear to have vindicated, occurred before the big bang by this definition. The universe during inflation was a deeply alien place, devoid of matter, governed by primeval ur-forces, and thoroughly quantum."

1. "....occurred before the big bang by this definition..."
Isn't it great when you can define your theory into fact?

“There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them.”
― George Orwell



2. Know anything about Gabriele Veneziano?
Know what he's famous for? String Theory.
Know how many accept String Theory today? Only Gabriele Veneziano.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Suit yourself. As Mr. Worf has said, "Die in ignorance. I can waste no more time on you."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Suit yourself. As Mr. Worf has said, "Die in ignorance. I can waste no more time on you."

"I can waste no more time on you."

Can I count on that as a promise?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

"Don't bet on it Jean-Luc."

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Don't bet on it Jean-Luc."

If I plead?

I desire that we be better strangers.
— William Shakespeare, As You Like It

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Sorry. When ignorant people malign science or pick and choose from it to substantiate a religious arguement, them's fightin' words to me.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Sorry. When ignorant people malign science or pick and choose from it to substantiate a religious arguement, them's fightin' words to me.

I do no such thing.

You mistake politics for science....I've often seen this in the less astute.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I do no such thing.

You mistake politics for science....I've often seen this in the less astute.

As I dmeonstrated in the post I initially replied to, your claim there was nothing prior to the big bang, even time, is incorrect. Your information isn't up to date. Had meant it to be light-hearted hence the smiley but now I see you have some ass backwards agenda which requires that to be true as your reluctance to update your knowledge suggests.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I do no such thing.

You mistake politics for science....I've often seen this in the less astute.

As I dmeonstrated in the post I initially replied to, your claim there was nothing prior to the big bang, even time, is incorrect. Your information isn't up to date. Had meant it to be light-hearted hence the smiley but now I see you have some ass backwards agenda which requires that to be true as your reluctance to update your knowledge suggests.

You remain a dope.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

You remain a dope.

Took ya 54 mins to come up with that? Were you mid-stutter?

 

[PoliticalChic]

You remain a dope.

Took ya 54 mins to come up with that? Were you mid-stutter?

Oh....did I call you a dope?

I meant an ass.

 

[Gadawg73]

Lot of good praying to God did that reporter that lost his head last week. I prefer AIM-120 AMRAAM and thousand pounder JDAM missles instead of physics.