0.0073

BidenPresident said:
God did it.
Click to expand...

If you believe God did it, that's fine.

I think it might possible to find physical explanations for fine tuning. We already have a reasonably plausible hypothesis for the cosmic flatness problem; it might be a consequence of the inflation hypothesis.
 
Cypress said:
If you believe God did it, that's fine.

I think it might possible to find physical explanations for fine tuning. We already have a reasonably plausible hypothesis for the cosmic flatness problem; it might be a consequence of the inflation hypothesis.
Click to expand...

How would "physical explanations for fine tuning" prove God doesnt exist? So if I can explain physically that air and fuel mixed in an engine cylinder which is then ignited by a spark makes a piston move which in turns moves a crankshaft means the internal combustion engine didnt have a designer?
 
Yakuda said:
How would "physical explanations for fine tuning" prove God doesnt exist? So if I can explain physically that air and fuel mixed in an engine cylinder which is then ignited by a spark makes a piston move which in turns moves a crankshaft means the internal combustion engine didnt have a designer?
Click to expand...

I don't think physical explanations prove or disprove the existence of a higher transcendent organizing principle.
 
Cypress said:
I don't think physical explanations prove or disprove the existence of a higher transcendent organizing principle.
Click to expand...

You realize your view here is in the small minority of people who identify as atheist or agnostic right?
 
Yakuda said:
You realize your view here is in the small minority of people who identify as atheist or agnostic right?
Click to expand...

I've never been the type to join teams or to look to where majority opinion is.

Holy Rollers and Militant atheists have more in common with than they realize. They both have 100 percent rock solid confidence in their opinions.
 
Cypress said:
I've never been the type to join teams or to look to where majority opinion is.

Holy Rollers and Militant atheists have more in common with than they realize. They both have 100 percent rock solid confidence in their opinions.
Click to expand...

I didn't suggest you did I just observed that your opinion is the tiny minority. Nothing more nothing less.

I don't consider myself a holy roller by any stretch of the imagination but I am 100% certain of the existence of God.
 
Last edited:
Yakuda said:
I didn't suggest you did I just observed that your opinion is the tiny minority. Nothing more nothing less.

I don't consider myself a holy roller by any stretch of the imagination but I am 100% certain of the existence of God.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with that.

Either way, I think religion is here to stay, even though it goes through cycles of popularity. Even when we strip away the religious context and language, the customs and ethics of Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism permeate society at some level . So in some sense, religion really did prevail.
 
Cypress said:
Nothing wrong with that.

Either way, I think religion is here to stay, even though it goes through cycles of popularity. Even when we strip away the religious context and language, the customs and ethics of Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism permeate society at some level . So in some sense, religion really did prevail.
Click to expand...

It did prevail as everyone who claims we don't need religion to tell us murder is wrong was raised in a society that was informed by religion how murder is wrong. To me they seem like fish who dont realize they live in water but believe they don't needed water to live.
 
Damocles said:
Someone reported this as rule 5, however this is not online content that can be linked, and posting a few paragraphs from a book is not a violation of the fair use act, if these were even direct paragraphs. I'm not sure. I don't have this book. Just noting here. This particular thread is not a violation of Fair Use, there isn't enough of the book quoted (if it is direct quoting) to cause an issue.
Click to expand...

Fuck me rigid, the heavy hitters are all here, what thread is complete without the likes of Daeash and Guano?
 
Yakuda said:
How would "physical explanations for fine tuning" prove God doesnt exist? So if I can explain physically that air and fuel mixed in an engine cylinder which is then ignited by a spark makes a piston move which in turns moves a crankshaft means the internal combustion engine didnt have a designer?
Click to expand...

Can you envision a way in which God could create a circle that did NOT automatically generate Pi?

This is why I think al this obsession on why physical constants come out with whatever random value they come out with is mainly navel-gazing without any real meaning.

Personally I think that if one wants to marvel at something it should be "Why is there more matter than antimatter?" or some such question. But pointing to some random 3 significant figure decimal number and oohing and aaahing as if it has some deeper MEANING seems like mental masturbation without the pleasure of an orgasm. Just stroking.
 
Yakuda said:
It did prevail as everyone who claims we don't need religion to tell us murder is wrong was raised in a society that was informed by religion how murder is wrong. To me they seem like fish who dont realize they live in water but believe they don't needed water to live.
Click to expand...

There's a kernel of truth to that.
I heard about a study on religion in South Korea, in which 46 percent of the Koreans identified as irreligious. But on closer inspection, 97 percent of those people identifying as irreligious tended to have values and practices deeply influenced by the Confucian virtues.
 
Perry said:
Pointing to some random 3 significant figure decimal number and oohing and aaahing as if it has some deeper MEANING seems like mental masturbation without the pleasure of an orgasm. Just stroking. This navel is SO AMAZING!
Click to expand...


Richard Feynman, one of the most premninent physicists of the 20th century: "The fine structure constant is one of the greatest damn mysteries in physics."

"(The fine structure constant) has been a mystery ever since it was discovered more than fifty years ago, and all good theoretical physicists put this number up on their wall and worry about it.) Immediately you would like to know where this number for a coupling comes from: is it related to pi or perhaps to the base of natural logarithms? Nobody knows. It's one of the greatest damn mysteries of physics: a magic number that comes to us with no understanding by man."

--> Richard Feynman



Who thinks it's pointless navel gazing to speculate at the meaning of the fine structure constant?

Perry, obscure message board poster and fake PhD


Who thinks the fine structure constant is worth wondering about and speculating about?

Nobel prize winning physicists Wolfgang Pauli, Richard Feynman, Paul Dirac

"Various 20th century quantum theoreticians made bold guesses, claims, and rambling metaphysical speculations about (the fine structure constant). Among them are Nobel Prize winners like Wolfgang Pauli, Paul Dirac, and Richard Feynman."
 
Last edited:
Cypress said:
Richard Feynman, one of the most premninent physicists of the 20th century: "The fine structure constant is one of the greatest damn mysteries in physics."

"(The fine structure constant) has been a mystery ever since it was discovered more than fifty years ago, and all good theoretical physicists put this number up on their wall and worry about it.) Immediately you would like to know where this number for a coupling comes from: is it related to pi or perhaps to the base of natural logarithms? Nobody knows. It's one of the greatest damn mysteries of physics: a magic number that comes to us with no understanding by man."

--> Richard Feynman



Who thinks it's pointless navel gazing to speculate at the meaning of the fine structure constant?

Perry, obscure message board poster and fake PhD


Who thinks the fine structure constant is worth wondering about and speculating about?

Nobel prize winning physicists Wolfgang Pauli, Richard Feynman, Paul Dirac

"Various 20th century quantum theoreticians made bold guesses, claims, and rambling metaphysical speculations about (the fine structure constant). Among them are Nobel Prize winners like Wolfgang Pauli, Paul Dirac, and Richard Feynman."
Click to expand...

LOL. You don't understand Feynman.

Just stop with this fake-ass erudition. You don't understand Feynman AT ALL.
 
Cypress said:
Richard Feynman, one of the most premninent physicists of the 20th century: "The fine structure constant is one of the greatest damn mysteries in physics."

"(The fine structure constant) has been a mystery ever since it was discovered more than fifty years ago, and all good theoretical physicists put this number up on their wall and worry about it.) Immediately you would like to know where this number for a coupling comes from: is it related to pi or perhaps to the base of natural logarithms? Nobody knows. It's one of the greatest damn mysteries of physics: a magic number that comes to us with no understanding by man."

--> Richard Feynman



Who thinks it's pointless navel gazing to speculate at the meaning of the fine structure constant?

Perry, obscure message board poster and fake PhD


Who thinks the fine structure constant is worth wondering about and speculating about?

Nobel prize winning physicists Wolfgang Pauli, Richard Feynman, Paul Dirac

"Various 20th century quantum theoreticians made bold guesses, claims, and rambling metaphysical speculations about (the fine structure constant). Among them are Nobel Prize winners like Wolfgang Pauli, Paul Dirac, and Richard Feynman."
Click to expand...

You know the funniest thing about you, Cypress, is you can't handle it when anyone presents anything that even SLIGHTLY deviates from what you have been told to think by someone else.

You don't read books to expand your mind, you read books so you know what to think. Someone else tells you and that's what you think.

It's a big "tell" that you never had a real philosophy class where you are encouraged to debate ideas, even take positions that are antithetical to "accepted wisdom".

LOL.
 
Perry said:
LOL. You don't understand Feynman.

Just stop with this fake-ass erudition. You don't understand Feynman AT ALL.
Click to expand...

It's really funny that you keep complaining this topic is just meaningless navel gazing, but then you keep coming back to the thread to read all the posts on it.



Who thinks it's pointless navel gazing to speculate at the meaning of the fine structure constant?

--> Perry, obscure message board poster and fake PhD


Who thinks the fine structure constant is actually worth wondering about and speculating about?

--> Nobel prize-winning physicists Wolfgang Pauli, Richard Feynman, Paul Dirac
 
Nordberg said:
The term" fine-tuning" implies a tuner. It is an observation of relationships between protons and electrons.
Click to expand...

aren't both sentences the same thing?....if you look at seven different things and the same relationship is found to the sixth decimal point, is it even rational to think the universe is a random thing?......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top