Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 11901 - 11920 of total 22771 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Dec 22, 2012 - 05:08pm PT
"Whereof one cannot speak, one thereof must be silent." Wittgenstein
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Dec 22, 2012 - 05:13pm PT
and what is an analogy and what purpose does it serve?

For that matter what purpose is served in calling me a knucklehead?


Dick.
Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Dec 22, 2012 - 05:19pm PT
if you can explain "everything" then there is no need to seek explanation elsewhere...

Can we explain everything at this moment?

Lets assume we can. Does that in and of itself rule out the possibility of something beyond the physical world?
In fact did not something 'exist' before the physical universe, even if it were only the absence of the physical universe?
I use the word "something" in a semantical way.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Dec 22, 2012 - 05:22pm PT
Analogy (from Greek ἀναλογία, analogia, "proportion"[1][2]) is a cognitive process of transferring information or meaning from a particular subject (the analogue or source) to another particular subject (the target), and a linguistic expression corresponding to such a process. In a narrower sense, analogy is an inference or an argument from one particular to another particular, as opposed to deduction, induction, and abduction, where at least one of the premises or the conclusion is general. The word analogy can also refer to the relation between the source and the target themselves, which is often, though not necessarily, a similarity, as in the biological notion of analogy.

there's more but thats the gist of it. An analogy is an example of physical parrallel for the purpose of inferring an argument or judgement. For instance, by calling me a knucklehead, that infers not that my cerebellum is physically composed more of bone than brain, but that I am not smart.

I know what you were driving at moron

Sorry. My mistake - Dick head.

Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Dec 22, 2012 - 05:30pm PT
what relevance does it have?

It may be irrelevant , but that does not mean it does not exist.
The categories of knowledge are not confined to relevance alone.

but it is looking like that answer might be "no" this instantiation of the universe might just be a part of a continuous process...

Does this mean the physical universe existed before the Big Bang?
Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Dec 22, 2012 - 05:37pm PT
what does existence mean if not physical

Something not physical, leaps to mind. Or if science can determine no physical universe preceded our''s then it would be that indetermined possibility, whatever it is.



Wow some kids just appeared at my door offering me a Christmas carol "Rudolf the red nose reindeer"
I brushed off my best Bing Crosby voice and joined in.
Gotta love it.
jogill

climber
Colorado
Dec 22, 2012 - 05:45pm PT
In fact did not something 'exist' before the physical universe

Perhaps "before" had no meaning at the "beginning." Time, itself, may have begun, along with space. We are conditioned by nature to recognize and function within a world of cause and effect. It is virtually impossible for us to entertain the concept of no "before", but reality might be different.
Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Dec 22, 2012 - 05:51pm PT
Perhaps "before" had no meaning at the "beginning." Time, itself, may have begun, along with space. We are conditioned by nature to recognize and function within a world of cause and effect. It is virtually impossible for us to entertain the concept of no "before", but reality might be different.

The important thing here is that if no physical universe preceded our universe then we have something which is ' not-our-physical-universe'
There must have been a 'before' or otherwise we are back to Hoyle's steady state.
Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Dec 22, 2012 - 05:59pm PT
Credit: Donald Thompson

Credit: Donald Thompson


Thanks for the conversations guys.
I am way out of my depth. And i mean that. Lol
jogill

climber
Colorado
Dec 22, 2012 - 05:59pm PT
we have something . . .

Do we? What is this "something" ? If there was no "before", then nothing existed - is this the "something'? After a while language gives way to confusion.

Confusion is to avoided by a 75 year-old !
Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Dec 22, 2012 - 06:02pm PT
Do we? What is this "something" ? If there was no "before", then nothing existed - is this the "something'? After a while language gives way to confusion.

That's why I stressed that the word "something" in this connection is entirely semantical.
We do have to talk about it using ordinary language at some point.

If you could back the universe up to a point right before those quarks started racing out would you have a 'before' ?

And did I hear it right that there are only 8 (or is it 16) type of quarks?

Why not 7, or 9?

If the universe were based on randomness you would expect that every Quark the Big Bang spit out would be different.

Gotta go.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Dec 22, 2012 - 06:21pm PT
ed

what is it in the universe that would lead you to believe that there is more than "just the physical?"

What about; Wind, Gravity, Waves, Earthquakes, Magnetism, Fire, Etc?
go-B

climber
Hebrews 1:3
Dec 22, 2012 - 06:24pm PT
Stevie Ray Vaughan & Jeff Healey


Sure do miss um!
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Dec 22, 2012 - 06:53pm PT
What about; Wind, Gravity, Waves, Earthquakes, Magnetism, Fire, Etc?

Oh man. That is why when I really try to explain something here it takes 1000 words, and then 20 posts later it is all forgotten.

Ask something good. Like what is quantum entanglement?

I've seen some science channel stuff, which means I know just enough to know the name and kinda sorta what it means. In a very touchy feely sort of way.

It really is like that. I'm so far off and deep into my field, and then somebody says that the Earth is 6000 years old (again). I hang my head and cry, or with a guy like that The Chief fella, just don't click on the thread at all for a couple of days.

I'm not as well spoken as Ed. I'm not as well spoken as MikeL for that matter.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Dec 22, 2012 - 06:55pm PT
Sure do miss um!

Yea! go-B

i saw Stevie Ray in 81' in San Diego
i coulda swore he was making the sky dance with his guitar.
MH2

climber
Dec 22, 2012 - 07:31pm PT
"Whereof one cannot speak, one thereof must be silent." Wittgenstein


That would shoot a lot of holes in the old Supertopo Forum, but it is good advice for sure.


Even though I cannot live by his words, here is a little more from Wittgenstein.



//Ludwig Wittgenstein believed that philosophical problems needed to be addressed not so much with solutions as with therapies.

"We must show the fly the way out of the fly-bottle."

It is important to keep alert to other points of view, just in case the problem lies with your formulation, and not with the actual reality that you are trying to understand.//





And from one of his students.



Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Dec 22, 2012 - 07:37pm PT
Why not 7, or 9? likely because of the fundamental symmetries that are the basis of our current universe.

Are you saying these fundamental symmetries preceded the Quarks- or were coincident with them at the beginning ?
What is the basis for considering these symmetries as being primary determinants for the number and type of Quarks? And not the other way around,namely, the types and numbers of Quarks predetermining the fundamental symmetries?

"If the universe were based on randomness you would expect that every Quark the Big Bang spit out would be different. "
why does this have to be "randomness"? it is not randomness... in fact, a large difficulty for many decades was to describe why it is so likely that this particular universe occurred, there is interesting ideas there (and theory, but I suspect it not to your taste to engage in it).

If randomness has any meaning in our universe at all why would it not be logical to assume it was a categorical imperative from the very beginning that every Quark that was initially spit out of the Big Bang would be completely different than all the others? Instead we have only six distinct differences.
If the fundamental symmetries predetermined the type and number of quarks would not that mean that those symmetries preceded the quarks ?
Why does the universe have to be confined to the symmetries to accommodate only 6 different types of Quarks.? Why not 5 or 7? Why not 60?
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Dec 22, 2012 - 07:54pm PT
Let's talk, first of all, about the basic principles of science since we're dealing with foundational things. Science deals with a matrix when we're talking about natural science. We're talking about the way things are in a material universe, there is a matrix of things. You have to have matter, you have to have force, you have to have energy, you have to have space and you have to have time. That is...that is Herbert Spencer's great achievement, he died in 1903, he said, "Everything in the universe can be deposited in one of these categories...time, force, action, space and matter." Force and action comprising energy. There has to be time, there has to be energy which is force and action, there has to be space, and there has to be matter. And by the way, those five things which he defined in that order are all in Genesis 1, "In the beginning...that's time...God...that's force...created...that's action...the heavens...that's space...and the earth...that's matter." The matrix is in Genesis 1:1, that is a profound scientific statement. The universe in essence is a...is a matrix of space, time, matter, and energy. And all of it has to be existing at the same conflux. It all has to come together or none of it exists. One cannot exist without the other. The entire continuum must have existed simultaneously from the beginning. That is why you find it all in Genesis 1:1, it all had to be there. Science says it has to be there and Scripture says it is there.

Now once the matrix comes into instantaneous simultaneous existence, its processes then are designed to operate in an orderly fashion, going forward. All the different phenomena within the matrix of nature and life are sustained by the forces that exist in that matrix. Time goes on, space goes on, energy goes on, matter goes on. It is all instantaneously and simultaneously coming into existence, it is then not only brought into existence by some external force and source, but it is then kept in prefect balance and function by that same power. It is sustained by the same force that brought it into existence. But everything that God made was made in six days. And it says in Genesis 2:2, "God ended His work which He had made." God stopped making anything. If you know science, you understand that that is scientifically accurate, nothing is being created, nothing is coming into existence, nothing has since creation, day six, and God's cessation of His work. The complete cessation of creative activity has been, by the way, in advertently recognized by modern science and they call it the law, the first law of thermodynamics and the first law of thermodynamics is called the conservation of mass and energy...the conservation of mass and energy. This is THE most and universal and certain of all scientific principles. Science has shown and verified that there is nothing being created in the known universe today. Things are doing what they do but not coming into existence newly. There is nothing new in the universe. In fact, the Bible tells us this in the most unaffected, the most simple, the most direct ways without ever defending itself as if its made some statement contrary to fact.



For example, in the words that come to us in the ninth chapter of Nehemiah, "In praise to God, in blessing to God," we read in Nehemiah 9:6, "Thou alone art the Lord, Thou hast made the heavens, the heaven of heavens with all their hosts, the earth and all that is in them, the seas and all that is in them. Thou dost give life to all of them." You made it all, everything that exists in the heaven and the earth and the seas, everything that lives, you made it all. That is an affirmation of God's completed and ended creation. Everything that is You made, and You made it all in those six days of creation.

I think it's in Isaiah, there are a lot of Scriptures that we could look up but there is another one, I think it's in Isaiah...yes, chapter 40 verse 26, "Lift up your eyes and see who has created these stars, the one who leads forth their host by number, He calls them all by name, not one of them is missing." Nothing comes into existence and nothing goes out of existence. This is the law, the first law of thermodynamics, the law of the conservation of mass and energy. Nothing is being created, nothing is going out of existence. And this is exactly what the Bible says in the most unaffected way and without any scientific pretension. For example, Ecclesiastes 1:9, "That which has been is that which will be and that which has been done is that which will be done and there is nothing new under the sun." In the third chapter of Ecclesiastes, verse 14, "I know that everything God does will remain forever." There is nothing to add to it, there is nothing to take from it. It is God so...it is God who has so worked it, that which is has been already, that which will be has already been, for God seeks what has passed by. This is the continuum of the creative reality, spontaneous generation, new creation doesn't happen. What perpetuates the creation is the conservation of mass and energy. And every organism that is a living organism has the seed of life within itself to reproduce itself.

Now there's a second law of thermodynamics and science has labeled this law, and the second law of thermodynamics is this...nothing new is being created, nothing is being destroyed, that is in the sense the first law. The second law is, however, all things are tending toward increasing disorder. This is the second law of thermodynamics. Energy is running down. It is losing its capacity to perform its work. There is increasing disorder. That means that slowly but observably the processes that God set in motion are winding down. We're heading toward the death of this creation. Now they don't have an explanation for that and it's a very hard thing to come up with an evolutionary view that everything is getting more complex, more intelligent and better while at the same time they can show scientifically that energy is dissipating and everything is tending toward chaos and disorder. All energy is running down and heading toward being incapable of performing its function.



Now God didn't make the world that way. God did not make the world that way. In fact, when God finished His creation, Genesis 1:31, He looked at it all and said, "It's...what?...it's very good." How do we explain what's happened? The Bible is the only place you can go for an explanation. Science has no explanation for the second law of thermodynamics. It has no explanation for the first law. Why is it that everything came into existence in a matrix at one time and continues in that same matrix? Why is it that if this is all a matter of chance, coincidence and randomness that that's not happening again and again and again and again? Why is it that it has come into existence in such a matrix of complexity and sustained itself in that matrix of complexity? That, in fact, is what drove Einstein crazy, if you would call him crazy, because he couldn't figure out the power was that held everything together. And how then do you explain this slow death? What is the reason for that? Only the Bible explains the matrix, the power of God is the invisible power that holds it all together and sustains it. And only the Bible explains why it's all tending toward disorder and death and the explanation comes in Genesis 3, it is the Fall and God curses creation. God curses creation. You read Genesis 3, man is cursed, woman is cursed. Sin enters into the world, the land is cursed, the ground is cursed. You have to till and work by the sweat of your brow to get something out of the land and fight all the cursed elements, the thorns, the weeds. And man has to fight against the weakness of his own body and his weariness and illness and disease because death enters the world and women have pain in childbearing. The ground is cursed. The whole creation is cursed. Read Romans 8:20 to 22. In Romans 8:20 to 22 the whole creation groans under the weight of the curse.

Science has no explanation for the first law of thermodynamics which they are glad to label but cannot explain how the complex matrix can come into existence in a moment, which all of which is required for anything to exist out of nothing. They cannot explain that nor can they explain how it holds itself together because there's no way to find the power that holds it together scientifically, nor can they explain the principle of disintegration and disorder in the second law of thermodynamics. The Bible explains both perfectly.

The Bible also explains that the second law of thermodynamics without calling it that is working its way down to an end, and the end must come and it will come, only it won't die a slow death, it will die an immediate death, as I just read you, when the Lord Jesus destroys this cursed universe and establishes a new heaven and a new earth. And in the new heaven and the new earth, there will be a different matrix. There will be a different matrix. There will be no time, there will be no space, there will be the energy of eternal life. It will be a completely different matrix and there will be no second law of thermodynamics. There will be no death, no sickness, no sorrow, no dying, no decay, no unrighteousness, no trouble, to pain, no destruction, and so forth and so forth.

So, you see, when you talk about science at the very basic level, it is only the Bible that gives you any sensible understanding for the way things really are. And we would expect that the one who made things the way they are, knows the way they are, and tells us the truth about the way they are. I stand so firmly before you as somebody who is not a scientist, by any stretch of the imagination, to say to you that I have read as extensively as I can read in science, particularly in those many, many months when I was going through Genesis chapters 1, 2 and 3, trying to understand science, true science, comparison to Scripture, and I have yet to find and I am supported by Christian scientists all over the country and all over the world who study far more in depth and more diligently than I who back up the fact that there has never ben any...any scientific discovery that is in true fact the way it really is that contradicts the biblical record...never...never.
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Dec 22, 2012 - 08:02pm PT
And thus fantasy and delusion reinforce themselves.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Dec 22, 2012 - 10:35pm PT
BB,

Regarding your claim about the amount of CO2 that was released by Mt. St. Helens vs. annual human CO2 discharge, it took me 2 minutes to find the USGS page on that very matter, with statistics:

http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/climate.php
Messages 11901 - 11920 of total 22771 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews