PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
because you are arguing with me while restating the same thing I said.......
Why do people still believe in Jesus and Christianity?
- Thread starter TexanManWithPlans
- Start date
because you are arguing with me while restating the same thing I said.......
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
dude, I am through reading your posts.......you contradict yourself more than the people arguing with you do.....
Into the Night
Verified User
Quantum mechanics is not a theory. It is a set of falsifiable theories, like everything else in science. It is a branch of physics.
Einstein helped to create quantum mechanics. It didn't blow his mind. You don't get to speak for everyone. You only get to speak for you. You cannot describe how many people understand quantum mechanics. Argument from randU fallacy.
WRONG. Philosophy defines what 'real' and 'reality' mean, not science.
Quantum mechanics is not voodoo. Insult fallacy. Denial of science. Denial of quantum mechanics.
Quantuum mechanics renders old fashioned Newtonian cause and effect paradigm moot, at least at quantuum scales.
Many extremely smart scientists consider quantuum fluctuations a possible explanation for the origin of the universe. That sounds at least as plausible to me, as a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis.
Wrapping up: as a matter of faith, there is nothing which says quantuum mechanics, Planck's constant, and an intelligent/purposeful design of the universe have to be incompatible.
Into the Night
Verified User
Easy. As long as the theory if falsifiable, it's science.
Into the Night
Verified User
Irrelevant. Science is not experiments. It is not a person. It is not people at all. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
Into the Night
Verified User
He does not know quantum mechanics. He is simply using it as a buzzword.
Into the Night
Verified User
I suggest you look up the history of the Theory of Motion, and the Theory of Gravitational Attraction. The development and initial testing of these theories is described in The Principia...author Isaac Newton. Here Newton publishes not only his theories, but how he developed them and tested them.
Plausible? Nothing subjective about this term whatsoever, its real scientific. You mean.......you have FAITH that what you believe is based upon truth in spite of the FACT that a simple lay person such as myself presented evidence that gives anyone with the least bit of intellect in regard to reason logic REASON TO DOUBT "your faith" based upon Conjecture, Speculation and theorized ideology? And you are effecting my faith based upon the scriptures.........how, I must ask again? You can believe that everything came from nothing if you wish, as for me I believe this plane of reality had a CAUSE and that cause is superior to nature.
You have done nothing except argue with circular reasoning while not presenting one FACT of SCIENCE to validate your faith in conjecture.
Last edited:
Into the Night
Verified User
I suggest you read up on Einstein's various letters and writings, and the history of the Theory of Relativity, the Theory of Special Relativity, the Theory of the Photoelectric effect, Planck's Law, the Stefan-Boltzmann law, Wien's Law, the Michaelson-Morley experiment, and the development of quantum mechanics.
Into the Night
Verified User
Science is not a 'method' or a 'procedure'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Quantum mechanics is not a theory. It is a set of theories. They are each falsifiable. They can each be tested. Some have been falsified, others remain intact. Others are inspired all the time.
Quantum mechanics is science. It is a branch of physics.
That's weird. You recently complained and argued to me that quantum mechanics was not science.
It looks like you are taking notes and learning from me
Into the Night
Verified User
An excellent question. Just what is 'falsifiable'? What does it actually mean?
A theory, any theory including scientific one, is nothing more than an explanatory argument. An argument is a set of predicates and a conclusion. No theory can ever be proven True.
A hypotheses is attached to a theory. Theories do not come out hypothesis. An example is the null hypothesis of a theory. This hypothesis poses the question on how to try to break the theory. How can a theory be shown to be False?
This is the basis of science. All theories of science must be falsifiable. In other words, a test must be available to test the null hypothesis. If it succeeds, the theory is utterly destroyed. The test must be available, practical, specific, and produce a specific result. It must test the theory itself. It must be designed to try to break the theory.
As long as a theory can withstand such tests intact, it remains a theory of science. It will continue to do so until it is falsified, that is, a test is developed that does indeed destroy the theory.
Example: Newton's Theory of Motion tended to presuppose that there existed such a thing as an absolute stationary object (one with an absolute zero speed). Einstein showed that there is no such thing as an absolute zero speed. He falsified that part of the Theory of Motion. The remainder of the Theory of Motion, however, remains intact. The Theory of Motion, as it turns out, does not NEED an absolutely stationary object. Newton's Law of Motion (there is just one, not three) is still F=mA. Nothing has changed. What Einstein showed was that the 'A' in the equation does not need to be a differential of a differential developed from an absolute speed. In other words, zero is where you personally choose to put it. There is no absolute zero speed.
In other words, Einstein's Theory of Relativity does not falsify Newton's Theory of Motion. Both theories still remain intact. They are both falsifiable. They are both testable. They are both theories of science.
For an example of a theory of science that has been falsified, one can look right back to Galileo. The Terracentric Universe was a theory of science. Galileo showed that moons orbit Jupiter. This directly conflicts with the idea that Earth is the center of the Universe. Thus, that theory was utterly destroyed. It was falsified.
Two new models of the Universe were developed; the Tychonian model and the solar centric model. Both of these were also theories of science. Both have been falsified.
The current models is that the Earth and the Sun orbit each other around a central point called the barycenter, and that both Earth and the Sun are orbiting the center of our galaxy, and that our galaxy is moving relative to other galaxies, and that there is no absolute zero speed in any part of the observable universe. 'Stationary' is literally what you choose it to be.
For practical purposes, you can use simply Newton's model, assuming that 'zero speed' is whatever is resting on the surface of the Earth with you standing or sitting where you are. Your radio, computer, stove, chair, and everything around you is 'stationary' most of the time.
Quantum mechanics is a set of falsifiable theories, just like everywhere else in science. That's what science is. Using quantum states of atoms, the entire periodic table is developed into the shape and size that it is today. It accurately describes the behavior of each element and why it has those properties. The periodic table itself is a product of quantum mechanics.
We know that it is possible to easily split the atom. We can strip electrons and protons off of them. It makes all our electronics and electrical systems work. It's what allows clouds to build up a charge enough to result in lightning. Electronics is not quantum mechanics, but the behavior of an LED can be described that way (indeed, the behavior of all cold light sources). We know that these particles themselves can form kind a 'periodic table', indicating that there are even smaller components making up electrons, neutrons, protons, photons, and other junk we see when we smack an atom apart in a particle accelerator. Experimentation in particle physics is a bit like trying to learn music by throwing a piano down the stairs. The only way we can see the effects of components making up atoms, electrons, protons, neutrons, photons, etc. is to blast the things apart and looking at the debris.
Theories of science can be inspired from this line of observation. Sometimes they get falsified. The predicted path of particle behaves in a way that is incompatible with a theory. All it takes is once. If that happens, that theory must be discarded. It is falsified.
Read all that. I went to college.
I know all that. I am much better educated than you.
bye, troll
Sew?
It does not bother me if you want to believe in a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis.Plausible? Nothing subjective about this term whatsoever, its real scientific. You mean.......you have FAITH that what you believe is based upon truth in spite of the FACT that a simple lay person such as myself presented evidence that gives anyone with the least bit of intellect in regard to reason logic REASON TO DOUBT "your faith" based upon Conjecture, Speculation and theorized ideology? And you are effecting my faith based upon the scriptures.........how, I must ask again? You can believe that everything came from nothing if you wish, as for me I believe this plane of reality had a CAUSE and that cause is superior to nature.
You have done nothing except argue with circular reasoning while not presenting one FACT of SCIENCE to validate your faith in conjecture.
I look to physics and cosmology for plausible speculations about the origins of the universe. But there is nothing about quantum gravity, dark energy, the cosmological constant which necessarily rule out the possibility of a purposeful design of the universe, perhaps involving a divinity or a higher truth of some sort. That is why I never join teams when the Bible Thumpers engage the Militant Atheists in their perpetual phony pissing contest on this terrain.