Started By
Message
re: Scientists confirm "No Big Bang. Universe has no beginning"
Posted on 2/10/15 at 5:57 pm to Kentucker
Posted on 2/10/15 at 5:57 pm to Kentucker
quote:
It is when the math supports the theory. That's second only to observational evidence. A major headache for physicists has been stitching together general relativity and quantum theory. That Ali and Das have linked them mathematically is significant and promising.
You make a good point, and I can't even pretend to begin to understand the math. But bad equations make bad outcomes. Humans put together the equations and humans draw the conclusions from them.
The math may be perfect - the mathematician, especially on this level of complexity, is not. Which is why origin theory seems to always evolve (no pun intended) so much and in ways that contradict earlier theories, also proven by the math.
But yeah, I don't want to even pretend like I know what the physicists (or whatever they were) in that article were talking about. Dang.
2
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:00 pm to Kentucker
quote:
Oh, please. The "scientific community" has no interest in mocking religion. Our only concern with religion is to keep it out of government. Science and theocracies don't get along very well.
I painted with a broad brush there. By scientific community I lumped in all the shallow, talking point, bullet point, troll, weekend scientist warriors/philosopher poets that like to jump in on these things. The mocking is definitely their thing.
Like me, for example.
And I'm not sure what a theocracy has to do with it, but whatever.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:10 pm to GoldenDawg
quote:
You make a good point, and I can't even pretend to begin to understand the math. But bad equations make bad outcomes. Humans put together the equations and humans draw the conclusions from them.
Math is just a language. It describes nature. There is no good or bad, just accurate and inaccurate. The equations are the same whether they're generated by humans or aliens (still no evidence of them, however
). They are discovered, not created. quote:
The math may be perfect - the mathematician, especially on this level of complexity, is not. Which is why origin theory seems to always evolve (no pun intended) so much and in ways that contradict earlier theories, also proven by the math.
I would say that there are math standards, rather than that math is perfect. Standards can change with new information. It's observation that solidifies a theory, not the math or the theorist.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:21 pm to Kentucker
quote:
I would say that there are math standards, rather than that math is perfect. Standards can change with new information. It's observation that solidifies a theory, not the math or the theorist.
So, even when the math "supports it", it's really a math standard or standards supporting it, and math standards can change, and with it the entire basis for the theory the math was based on (or the math the theory was based on).
Again - theories based on complex math/physics/quantum physics/logic/philosophy doesn't seem like something to get too worked up about. At least when it reaches this level of complexity. We still have way too much to learn, even about the basics of what is around us right now, let alone a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.
This post was edited on 2/10/15 at 6:29 pm
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:27 pm to Stacked
It amuses me how much some folks (on both sides) care about this, tbh
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:35 pm to Stacked
This is the kind of thing where you wish you had a tab of really good acid to sit back and contemplate.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:37 pm to GoldenDawg
quote:
We still have way too much to learn
That's why knowledge should be dynamic and open-ended. If infinity exists for anything, it's knowledge, I think.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:41 pm to Tigerwaffe
quote:
This is the kind of thing where you wish you had a tab of really good acid to sit back and contemplate.
I've always wondered about that. I've read some papers, don't know if it was creditable research, that say LSD can help the user focus his thoughts to a point wherein clarity is achieved that would not be possible for the non-user. Is that what you mean?
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:42 pm to Stacked
Answer: No one knows
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:43 pm to Kentucker
You should test it out
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:44 pm to CheeseburgerEddie
I'd love to but I don't know how to obtain the LSD.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:46 pm to Kentucker
You seem like a problem solver, it wouldn't be difficult. where do you live?
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:49 pm to CheeseburgerEddie
If it doesn't involve people, yes I'm a problem solver. When it comes to dealing with people, however, I'm as helpless as Sheldon Cooper.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:53 pm to Kentucker
Just go find some hippies. If you go to Chicago over the 4th of July weekend and go by Grant Park / Soldier field on the 3rd, 4th it 5th you will find a ton of the real shite. Dont buy from anyone younger than 55 though
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:54 pm to Kentucker
I know people.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 6:59 pm to Rebelgator
Don't do it kentucker - some poster on here told me he was a narc
Posted on 2/10/15 at 7:00 pm to CheeseburgerEddie
Posted on 2/10/15 at 7:17 pm to GoldenDawg
quote:
It's just a mere theory. This one is as good as the last one and will be as good as the next one.
Here we sit on an infinitesimal speck on this dust mote of a galaxy somewhere in the midst of something we don't even really know what and theorize about things.
All well and good and an honorable pursuit. But we're still just a bunch of mutts still trying to figure out the door knob, let alone the light switch, etc.
So, anyway, no theory is worth getting too worked up over. There will always be another one coming along shortly
Take the red pill and I'll explain to you exactly how it all works ...
Posted on 2/10/15 at 7:27 pm to Stacked
Genesis 1:1 is all you need to know.
This post was edited on 2/10/15 at 7:28 pm
Posted on 2/10/15 at 7:38 pm to GoldenDawg
quote:
The scientific community mocked that as fable, fairy tale, magic pixie dust, superstition, you name it. Admit it, many on here did the same.
Science doesn't mock religion. Here's how it goes:
Science: "Here is what the evidence tells us."
Religion: "Here is why you are wrong, according to our religious text."
Science: "But your religious text has objective problems X, Y and Z."
Religion: "Stop mocking my religion!!!"
The mere fact that science refutes religion in certain instances doesn't mean science is mocking religion. The fact that the religious take offense is irrelevant.
Page 2 of 7
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News