- This topic is empty.
- Posts
We have reached an interesting point in the history of physics. There are many physicists worried about how little progress has been made recently in developing a GUT. It is on average every 25 years they expect a major breakthough? I heard that figure somewhere. We are overdue the next big thing.
Maybe the Higgs Boson from the LHC?
Stuart
Quote (Tim Kraft @ July 01 2009,00:50) Check out Quantum Theory! At 0-point energy all that existed was entangled or ONE! TK
The Holy Wikipedia has this to say on the application of zero point energy to cosmology:Unsolved problems in physics: Why doesn't the zero-point energy density of the vacuum change with changes in the volume of the universe? And related to that, why doesn't the large constant zero-point energy density of the vacuum cause a large cosmological constant? What cancels it out?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ July 01 2009,07:27) Quote (Tim Kraft @ July 01 2009,00:50) Check out Quantum Theory! At 0-point energy all that existed was entangled or ONE! TK
The Holy Wikipedia has this to say on the application of zero point energy to cosmology:Unsolved problems in physics: Why doesn't the zero-point energy density of the vacuum change with changes in the volume of the universe? And related to that, why doesn't the large constant zero-point energy density of the vacuum cause a large cosmological constant? What cancels it out?
Stuart
Greetings Stu…..Allow me to give you a realy bizzare answer to a truely complicated question in an area that I have no knowledge of…..The Creation Is Complete….Science and God are about to converge….As you know, my feelings that, science was just a continuation of the creation is what I base this theory on…Quote (theodorej @ July 10 2009,01:27) Quote (Stu @ July 01 2009,07:27) Quote (Tim Kraft @ July 01 2009,00:50) Check out Quantum Theory! At 0-point energy all that existed was entangled or ONE! TK
The Holy Wikipedia has this to say on the application of zero point energy to cosmology:Unsolved problems in physics: Why doesn't the zero-point energy density of the vacuum change with changes in the volume of the universe? And related to that, why doesn't the large constant zero-point energy density of the vacuum cause a large cosmological constant? What cancels it out?
Stuart
Greetings Stu…..Allow me to give you a realy bizzare answer to a truely complicated question in an area that I have no knowledge of…..The Creation Is Complete….Science and God are about to converge….As you know, my feelings that, science was just a continuation of the creation is what I base this theory on…
You are right, that is a really bizarre answer. It does ride on the back of science, because science is fundamentally in agreement about its principles, while no two christians even agree on what god is, let alone what any god has ever done.I assert, with just as much evidence as you provided, that science exists and no gods do, thus we have
science + gods = science
I predict the result of this merger of which you write will be indistinguishable from science. As usual.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ July 10 2009,07:17) Quote (theodorej @ July 10 2009,01:27) Quote (Stu @ July 01 2009,07:27) Quote (Tim Kraft @ July 01 2009,00:50) Check out Quantum Theory! At 0-point energy all that existed was entangled or ONE! TK
The Holy Wikipedia has this to say on the application of zero point energy to cosmology:Unsolved problems in physics: Why doesn't the zero-point energy density of the vacuum change with changes in the volume of the universe? And related to that, why doesn't the large constant zero-point energy density of the vacuum cause a large cosmological constant? What cancels it out?
Stuart
Greetings Stu…..Allow me to give you a realy bizzare answer to a truely complicated question in an area that I have no knowledge of…..The Creation Is Complete….Science and God are about to converge….As you know, my feelings that, science was just a continuation of the creation is what I base this theory on…
You are right, that is a really bizarre answer. It does ride on the back of science, because science is fundamentally in agreement about its principles, while no two christians even agree on what god is, let alone what any god has ever done.I assert, with just as much evidence as you provided, that science exists and no gods do, thus we have
science + gods = science
I predict the result of this merger of which you write will be indistinguishable from science. As usual.
Stuart
Greetings Stu….As you well know the arguments presented on both sides are theoretical and my feeling is that the presence of God is the essence of science and yes you are correct… there are those who can't and will not be able to tell the difference between God and science….this condition will exist until such time as God sees fit to reveal himself to those individuals.Quote (theodorej @ July 21 2009,00:37) Quote (Stu @ July 10 2009,07:17) Quote (theodorej @ July 10 2009,01:27) Quote (Stu @ July 01 2009,07:27) Quote (Tim Kraft @ July 01 2009,00:50) Check out Quantum Theory! At 0-point energy all that existed was entangled or ONE! TK
The Holy Wikipedia has this to say on the application of zero point energy to cosmology:Unsolved problems in physics: Why doesn't the zero-point energy density of the vacuum change with changes in the volume of the universe? And related to that, why doesn't the large constant zero-point energy density of the vacuum cause a large cosmological constant? What cancels it out?
Stuart
Greetings Stu…..Allow me to give you a realy bizzare answer to a truely complicated question in an area that I have no knowledge of…..The Creation Is Complete….Science and God are about to converge….As you know, my feelings that, science was just a continuation of the creation is what I base this theory on…
You are right, that is a really bizarre answer. It does ride on the back of science, because science is fundamentally in agreement about its principles, while no two christians even agree on what god is, let alone what any god has ever done.I assert, with just as much evidence as you provided, that science exists and no gods do, thus we have
science + gods = science
I predict the result of this merger of which you write will be indistinguishable from science. As usual.
Stuart
Greetings Stu….As you well know the arguments presented on both sides are theoretical and my feeling is that the presence of God is the essence of science and yes you are correct… there are those who can't and will not be able to tell the difference between God and science….this condition will exist until such time as God sees fit to reveal himself to those individuals.
Hi theodorej…Which is not theoretical, but a religious fantasy concept based on nothing more than the contents of your head, as is the case with everything to do with all the christian gods.
Do you think the god of the Amish will choose to reveal itself too?
Stuart
Quote (david @ Dec. 15 2009,18:34) You guys know there really is no “edge” to the universe, don't you?
Doesn't it depend on what you mean by edge?Stuart
Where is the edge of the world? New Zealand?
Perhaps when you travel in a straight line for long enough you end up back where you started.
If the universe is infinite then maybe it is an infinite circle/sphere.Travelling on the circumference of an infinite circle would appear to us as a straight line. So if we travel in a straight line through space, then perhaps we will never reach the edge of the universe.
Maybe what is infinite in 3 dimensions is finite in higher dimensions?
Or maybe the universe is expanding faster than we will ever travel, so we will never see the edge?
Who among us knows?
This is why we all have faith or belief in something as being the cause and the end.
In the end it boils down to:
- God,
- Nothing
- Something inanimate.
Most people believe in God.
Atheists believe in either nothing or something inanimate as the origin of all. But they are however unsure which one. Of course that doesn't stop some of them from rubbishing belief in God which is of course a display in ignorance x arrogance because they write off one of the 3 options with no proof and lots of bias.The difference between what atheists (might) believe and what god-believers (seem to) believe is nothing more than one god, added by the believer to no explanatory effect whatever.
They may as well believe in Juju or Zeus for all the difference it really makes in determining the nature of the universe.
Stuart
Logic dictates that design is the result of a designer. Effect has a cause. Any amount of finite can easily be the result of infinite.
Yet some self-proclaimed logical men think that this isn't always the case. What they fail to see is that nothing is no explanation at all, and to think that the universe has always existed in some form is also ridiculous.Whoever heard of something non-intelligent coming up with superior designs and invention when compared to 7 billion collective humans with an individual IQ ranging between 1-230?
The lack of logic and considered thought that atheists promote is truly outstanding.
t8
Quote Logic dictates that design is the result of a designer. Effect has a cause.
Both true by definition. So what?Quote Any amount of finite can easily be the result of infinite.
Meaningless drivel. Finite and infinite are adjectives. Next?Quote Yet some self-proclaimed logical men think that this isn't always the case. What they fail to see is that nothing is no explanation at all, and to think that the universe has always existed in some form is also ridiculous.
What they should fail to see is what on earth you are on about.Quote Whoever heard of something non-intelligent coming up with superior designs and invention when compared to 7 billion collective humans with an individual IQ ranging between 1-230? The lack of logic and considered thought that atheists promote is truly outstanding.
Good to talk with you t8. Do you have any new material? If you want to up the ratings you might do something more absurd than this mere incoherent nonsense.How about the hydroplate “theory”?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ June 18 2010,17:58) Meaningless drivel. Finite and infinite are adjectives. Next?
Oh I see. The concept of limited and eternal are now drivel.
Right. That attitude explains a lot doesn't it.If you can't argue it, call it drivel and hopefully you win. Is that it? The problem however, is that people who can reason, will not accept that answer when they know that finite and infinite describe ideas.
I know a mathematician. I should tell him that I heard from an intelligent atheist source that finite and infinite are drivel. Do you think that this logical man will agree?
Quote (t8 @ June 20 2010,10:57) Quote (Stu @ June 18 2010,17:58) Meaningless drivel. Finite and infinite are adjectives. Next?
Oh I see. The concept of limited and eternal are now drivel.
Right. That attitude explains a lot doesn't it.If you can't argue it, call it drivel and hopefully you win. Is that it? The problem however, is that people who can reason, will not accept that answer when they know that finite and infinite describe ideas.
I know a mathematician. I should tell him that I heard from an intelligent atheist source that finite and infinite are drivel. Do you think that this logical man will agree?
I didn't say that. How about you have another read of it.Stuart
Quote (Stu @ May 12 2009,11:47) So size prevents understanding. The height of the Empire State building is more difficult to understand than the height of the Skytower. I watched carefully but I didn't see any creator. I heard a man beg the question about one near the end, but he did not show a photograph or provide any evidence of this thing. I guess it must have been a figure of speech, in the way Hawking uses the word 'god' even though he is not a believer.
Stuart
hey stu,what are you saying here?
it doesnt make sense to me,
because it obvious the creation of the empire state building was made by some archetiect, as we know,that every building as a architect, someone desighned the building.
I have never seen someone look at the building looking for the creator when the answer is already given, that the building is created and there is a creator.Creation has a creator,
The world is created whether by progressive means or what not, but the world of today mangaged to be the way it is by the plans of a creator.
we have always observed this. everything we do is created adn there is a creator.
Quote (Stu @ June 18 2010,17:58) Good to talk with you t8. Do you have any new material?
Why do I need to waste new material on you when the old one has you stumped?I will keep throwing the old stuff at you until you can give me a logical opposing explanation.
If I was in a boxing ring and my left hook knocked you down every time, then I would have no need to change my game plan, unless of course I knew that it wasn't going to work again. But I know that my old argument will work again and again on you because truth is a hard thing to fight. So you first need to stop the left hook at which time I might launch a new plan of attack. Until then I can keep swinging my left hook with my eyes closed with full confidence that you have no answer to it. And if you do have an answer, I would dearly love to see it.
Quote (t8 @ June 22 2010,18:06) Then stop complaining. Infinite can contain an infinite amount of finite.
No it can't. You are using the adjective instead of the noun infinity.Stuart
Trying to win an argument on a technicality rather than the subject is what people do when they are losing Stu.
Think of the Italians goal against the All Whites. No offence if you are an Italian.You obviously understand my point, and that is what matters.
Try to think of infinite numbers and finite numbers.How many finite numbers can fit into an infinite number?
Does my point stand?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
