- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi princess.
I think the said person looked too closely at the pendulum to see if I was correct and it cracked him in the skull, judging by his comments at least.
t8
Quote to be honest, I don't read most of it
That’s pretty clear.Quote because of what I do read, it seems lame to me as it lacks any creativity and is really just a bunch of 'no no nos, my bias doesn't agree with that' comments.
I don’t create lies about things, if that is what you mean by creativity. I disagree it is bias, I don’t see you coming up with any decent counter-arguments. This thread was going well until you stuffed the whole thing up by stomping all over Einstein’s subtlety. We could have had agreement if you had bothered to do your homework and actually understood the utter contempt Einstein would have reserved for your god concept. That is not my fault, and it is not Einstein’s fault, and I think he should not be misrepresented by you. We have been there before with Darwin, now maybe you will do some background before another round of blundering in where angels fear to tread.Einstein’s quotes speak for themselves, they do not need you to interpret them for us all, but you reinterpreted them in terms of your Imaginary Friend, and were projecting that idea onto Einstein too. Einstein was clear that he was no atheist. That does not mean he would agree that he needed redeeming, or even that there is value in a traditional Jewish interpretation of god. You did remember he was of Jewish heritage and that he would have disagreed with your god concept no matter what, didn’t you.
Quote Anyway, your activity appears to be symptomatic of Albert's following quote:
“Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.”
I am not violent, so the symptoms do not fit. I don’t think I have a mediocre mind, either. On the other hand, what was the nature of your opposition to the great mind of Steven Hawking (by the base discourtesy of intentionally mis-spelling his name) or to Darwin (by telling lies about his theory)? Isn’t this just a teeny bit hypocritical t8?Quote Anyway, moving along. This quote of Albert's:
“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”
places you firmly in the science without religion camp.
While I am in neither camp because I respect both science and religion.
I balance both, you reject one.
Please see my previous post on the question of your lack of understanding of this quote of Einstein. If you want to make it into your own parody then that is your business. Although I do not think of Spinoza’s god because I think the universe does not even need that concept, I agree with Einstein in the spirit of his use of the term religion. Just to be clear, in Einstein’s mind the equation for gravitational force, F=GMm/r^2, was a name for Spinoza’s god. I think that would have been even too abstract for Spinoza.And too complicated for you, evidently.
Stuart
Quote (princess @ Sep. 21 2011,09:55) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 20 2011,18:11) Quote (princess @ Sep. 20 2011,13:25) 'That part is called balance and if the pendulum could sit there, it would be peaceful with no extremes. ' Well said T8.
But what did he actually say?Stuart
Prince,To me: When one has peace there is balance.
That is a platitude far beneath you, princess.Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 21 2011,10:15) Hi princess. I think the said person looked too closely at the pendulum to see if I was correct and it cracked him in the skull, judging by his comments at least.
I didn't defecate over Einstein's grave by claiming him as “one of mine”. Effectively, you did. I think the best thing you could do is to log in as administrator and delete this thread. That might enhance your reputation amongst those who have at least had a go at discovering Einstein's nuanced meaning.Stuart
I demonstrated aptly that you were on the short end of the stick regarding Albert's quotes.
Here is another:“The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.”
When it comes to talking about anything, if it doesn't fit in a test-tube you disregard it.
I do not disregard intuition. I respect both, you do not.Face it Stu.
This quote surely represents you.
“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”I love both, so I am not included in this statement.
Don't bother trying to wriggle out Stu. You have been cornered.
Just admit it or at the very least say nothing and take it quietly.Stu, we are both represented in this quote:
“There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.”
You are the former and myself the latter.
Stu, I am not trying to say that Albert is my brother, or that we are the same.
I am proving that you cannot use him to back up what you have been saying on HN that is all.
Hence the points I made.I also point to differences I have with his outlook on life, but make the point that he was passionate with his search for truth in the places he was interested in looking and so am I.
We both look/ed in different places, and what we found is obviously not the same, but at best just different ends of the elephant.
I make the point that you appear to be a person who needs to feed off others, and you simply criticize those who your beliefs and religion doesn't align, (with little or no proof or logic), and praise those that do align with your bias and beliefs. I make the point that this type of behavior is inline with a mediocre or shallow mind versus a great spirit.
Talking about science and religion, the scientist I probably respect the most is Sir Isaac Newton. IMO he is the perfect example of a man who searched deeply on many levels and his voyage of discovery led to many profound discoveries both spiritual and physical. I also liked the fact that he searched out spiritual things even more than physical things, which showed the order of importance that he held regarding both. In fact I believe that a correct spiritual understanding will aid in understanding the physical.
Such men I have great respect for. But for a man who spends his time pulling down what people believe or have discovered is a mediocre mind to me. Yes there is a time and place for pulling things down, but that shouldn't be the defining activity of our voyage of discovery, because by itself it is not a journey of discovery, rather at best, a necessary removal of a stumbling block in order to make the way free for part of the journey.
I just don't see any evidence of a great spirit, a deep search, or sound conclusions from your words Stu.
I wouldn't want to help you dig yourself into this hole of cringe any further t8, so I'll just say that I stand by what I have written already.
Stuart
Well like I said Stu, “I just don't see any evidence of a great spirit, a deep search, or sound conclusions from your words Stu.” But feel free to stand by your words that is your choice alone to make. It is not illegal to be mediocre or shallow.
Some of the points you stand next however says stuff that I do not even claim.
I am not making the claim that Einstein would respect my testimony and experience. Where did I say that? You need to read my words properly.He might, he might not. But I can tell you this. If he heard my testimony regarding my journey and what I have discovered and experienced first-hand, and if after that he indeed had utter contempt for my words, then it would be true that he would have that same contempt for one of his fellows, and even greater man by the name of Isaac Newton. And to deny my experience is permissible, but it would show a lack of openness to me and me alone because it is my experience. e.g., if you experienced something amazing for yourself and Albert Einstein said to you that you were full of crap and showed contempt, then to you, you would know that his conclusion was wrong because you had a first hand experience. It probably wouldn't mean much to others, but to you it does.
Anyway, I think you are missing the point of what he says with the religion without science and vice versa. If he had utter contempt for religion full stop, then why even make that comment. Look again at the third comment.
“The third style, which Einstein deemed most mature, originates in a deep sense of awe and mystery. He said, “The individual feels […] the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves in nature […] and he wants to experience the universe as a single significant whole.”
And he calls that religion. But you deny that you have any religion Stu. (So you are still lame by his standards.)
And yet, when you look at his comment, it isn't actually that far away from “The Heavens Declare The Glory of God”.
Albert Einstein is not saying that the universe reveals a personal God, (as you may think I interpret it as) rather it reveals glory and order. But an even greater scientist than he, went further and was able to attribute that glory and order to a personal God. So do you think that it could be possible that Einstein had limitations? Of course, when all said and done he was still a man who had 2 eyes, one brain, and existed in one place at a time for a short time.
No matter where one is at, not matter how far they get in their discovery of truth, the point I make Stu is that you seem to fulfill the attributes of Albert's comments of a mediocre mind. There is no profound mystery in your words, no passion for truth, just your belief that you are right and God doesn't exist, and then we never hear anything profound as to why. You just use this mediocre lame excuse that there are many interpretations of God such as Zeus, thus God cannot exist. I fail to see the logic myself. The logic I see is that the vast majority if humanity believes in a God and as scripture says, we do not know him because we are cut off from him by our sin. So if that is true, then it fits the fact that men believe, but argue over Who, or other details. This situation is further exacerbated by blind followers who are too busy or lazy to travel down the path of discovery for themselves.
To this day Stu, you cannot even explain what caused everything. Of the three possible options, (Nothing, Something and Someone) you simply delete one of the options by bias alone and then cannot explain which of the remaining two is right.
So what have you discovered. Sounds like very little to me, except how to put down the experience of others. Is this not dull, mediocre, and shallow? Did you not think that we would find out what manner of man you were by your words? We have known for quite some time Stu. What will it take for you to wake up and change?
Move over Einstein.
——————–
Particles found to break speed of light, challenging laws of physics.
Maybe Einstein was wrong about a personal God too?
Nevertheless, even if he is wrong about the speed of light, he is still brilliant.An international team of scientists says it has recorded sub-atomic particles travelling faster than light – a finding that could overturn one of Albert Einstein's long-accepted fundamental laws of the universe.
Antonio Ereditato, spokesman for the researchers, said that measurements taken over three years showed neutrinos pumped from CERN near Geneva to Gran Sasso in Italy had arrived 60 nanoseconds quicker than light would have done.
Advertisement: Story continues below
“We have high confidence in our results. We have checked and rechecked for anything that could have distorted our measurements but we found nothing,” he said. “We now want colleagues to check them independently.”
If confirmed, the discovery would undermine Einstein's 1905 theory of special relativity, which says that the speed of light is a “cosmic constant” and that nothing in the universe can travel faster.
That assertion, which has withstood over a century of testing, is one of the key elements of the so-called Standard Model of physics, which attempts to describe the way the universe and everything in it works.
The totally unexpected finding emerged from research by a physicists working on an experiment dubbed OPERA run jointly by the CERN particle research centre near Geneva and the Gran Sasso Laboratory in central Italy.Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/technol….ix4hyiN
There was an experiment done in Austria in the 1990s in which it was claimed that a signal had been sent across a wave barrier faster than the speed of light, using an effect called quantum tunneling. I'm not sure how seriously their data was taken. If the Americans can repeat this CERN experiment, and it turns out to be some effect like quantum tunneling, well Einstein wouldn't have liked that at all.
Just as his god was the apparent order of the universe (but not the creation of the universe) as revealed in the laws of physics (simpler to think of his god AS the laws of physics), he was committed to this when it came to explaining the universe in general too. “God does not play dice” refers to his disagreements with Heisenberg about the uncertainty principle: you cannot know both the speed and the position of a particle accurately. Einstein though that it should be possible to know both if experimental method was up to it, but Heisenberg showed that his idea is a fundamental property of the universe. So strictly speaking Einstein was wrong, his god (Spinoza's god) does indeed play dice.
This faster-than-light neutrino burst could be another effect of this type, and another example of Einstein's god playing dice while he is not watching.
Watch this space. Or maybe the Fermilab website http://www.fnal.gov/.l
Stuart
Further reading about this result has some thinking the explanation is as follow, (in order of probability):
- Error in calculation.
- Worm hole or dimensional shortcut, (like to travelling from London to Auckland through the Earth rather than around).
- Correct calculation
Quote (Stu @ Sep. 21 2011,17:52) Quote (princess @ Sep. 21 2011,09:55) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 20 2011,18:11) Quote (princess @ Sep. 20 2011,13:25) 'That part is called balance and if the pendulum could sit there, it would be peaceful with no extremes. ' Well said T8.
But what did he actually say?Stuart
Prince,To me: When one has peace there is balance.
That is a platitude far beneath you, princess.Stuart
PrinceNo, not platitude, just selfish. There is a difference. Once you start on a conversation about religion, you mind holds this thought and does not break away from it.
Does this mean you do not have peace within yourself, and therefore brings no balance into your universe?
I do not see you one for chaos Prince, your OCD will deter this in a matter of seconds.
Prince,
I cannot find the comment you made in regards to atheists gathering together, however, I find it amusing that here in the US, they have many gatherings. Atheist.org
If you are planning a trip over, let me know, we could have tea.
Quote (princess @ Sep. 24 2011,22:07) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 21 2011,17:52) Quote (princess @ Sep. 21 2011,09:55) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 20 2011,18:11) Quote (princess @ Sep. 20 2011,13:25) 'That part is called balance and if the pendulum could sit there, it would be peaceful with no extremes. ' Well said T8.
But what did he actually say?Stuart
Prince,To me: When one has peace there is balance.
That is a platitude far beneath you, princess.Stuart
PrinceNo, not platitude, just selfish. There is a difference. Once you start on a conversation about religion, you mind holds this thought and does not break away from it.
Does this mean you do not have peace within yourself, and therefore brings no balance into your universe?
I do not see you one for chaos Prince, your OCD will deter this in a matter of seconds.
A platitude “explained” in terms of platitudes!You could have a brilliant career in the so-called diplomatic service of the Holy See…
…if they were not misogynistic criminals.
Stuart
Quote (princess @ Sep. 24 2011,22:12) Prince, I cannot find the comment you made in regards to atheists gathering together, however, I find it amusing that here in the US, they have many gatherings. Atheist.org
If you are planning a trip over, let me know, we could have tea.
Yes, I subscribed to one such site for atheists once, although I did not contribute much there if at all. The owners of the site sent out an email last week saying they were closing down. It sounded like it was for sheer lack of interest in cat herding.Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Sep. 24 2011,23:24) Quote (princess @ Sep. 24 2011,22:07) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 21 2011,17:52) Quote (princess @ Sep. 21 2011,09:55) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 20 2011,18:11) Quote (princess @ Sep. 20 2011,13:25) 'That part is called balance and if the pendulum could sit there, it would be peaceful with no extremes. ' Well said T8.
But what did he actually say?Stuart
Prince,To me: When one has peace there is balance.
That is a platitude far beneath you, princess.Stuart
PrinceNo, not platitude, just selfish. There is a difference. Once you start on a conversation about religion, you mind holds this thought and does not break away from it.
Does this mean you do not have peace within yourself, and therefore brings no balance into your universe?
I do not see you one for chaos Prince, your OCD will deter this in a matter of seconds.
A platitude “explained” in terms of platitudes!You could have a brilliant career in the so-called diplomatic service of the Holy See…
…if they were not misogynistic criminals.
Stuart
PrinceThere you go again, waving your arms in the air as a defense mechanism, because someone agreed to a sentence that used peace and balance, you really have not caught on, perhaps that is the same reason why I could not be accepted into the Holy Realm of criminals, they have not caught on either.
All accounts, for you not to understand peace and balance, then please refrain from using the word spiritual.
Quote (Stu @ Sep. 24 2011,23:29) Quote (princess @ Sep. 24 2011,22:12) Prince, I cannot find the comment you made in regards to atheists gathering together, however, I find it amusing that here in the US, they have many gatherings. Atheist.org
If you are planning a trip over, let me know, we could have tea.
Yes, I subscribed to one such site for atheists once, although I did not contribute much there if at all. The owners of the site sent out an email last week saying they were closing down. It sounded like it was for sheer lack of interest in cat herding.Stuart
Tis a shame, I was so looking forward to having tea with you.The cat herding comment did catch my attention, though it would not be proper to dictate my thoughts on the matter, especially using a metaphoric humor regarding cats. Perhaps your thoughts were the same?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
