Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 122 (8764 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-28-2017 8:21 PM
382 online now:
14174dm, Asgara (AdminAsgara), DrJones*, Phat (AdminPhat), Pollux, Porosity (6 members, 376 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: superuniverse
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 812,377 Year: 16,983/21,208 Month: 2,872/3,593 Week: 339/646 Day: 102/115 Hour: 0/4

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Possibility Order of Magnetude Metric (POMM)
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18669
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 1 of 5 (722198)
03-18-2014 7:10 AM


We see any number of arguments that "X" is possible when dealing with YEC arguments.

Example: speed of movement of tectonic plates -- to get from one continent just after the flood (so the animals can disperse to their current locations) the blocks must move at a pretty fantastic clip ... is it possible?

Technically anything is "possible" but a critical analysis says that it is not very possible ...

To get a handle on this I propose a metric to deal with this issue: The POMM, the "Possibility Order of Magnitude Metric."

Take the current known maximum rate (CKMR)-- any proposal that uses this rate is assigned a POMM value of 1 (highly possible)

Double that rate is assigned a POMM of 0.5 (fairly possible)

The rest is an exponential curve:

POMM = (1/2)r
where r = proposed rate / CKMR

So if one proposes that continents move at 1 foot per day when the CKMR is 1 inch per year the POMM would be (1/2)(12x365) = 3.080484244×10⁻ąłą⁹

Edited by Admin, : Remove unnecessary and possibly confusing "^" characters.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Stile, posted 03-18-2014 9:24 AM RAZD has responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12516
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 2 of 5 (722200)
03-18-2014 9:03 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Possibility Order of Magnetude Metric (POMM) thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
Stile
Member
Posts: 2896
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 3 of 5 (722203)
03-18-2014 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
03-18-2014 7:10 AM


RAZD writes:

The rest is an exponential curve:

Makes sense to me.

My first question was "why an exponential curve?"
But, well, I can understand it in the context of "it's rational to think things are generally consistent throughout history" with what we know of measurements and repeatability and all that. Therefore, the exponential curve is signifying how "crazy" things can get as you get further and further away from our "rational" expectations.

So, the exponential curve does make sense to me.

But... I don't think the argument will have much of an impact on those you would intend to use it for...
They seem to believe that history was not anything we're used to or anything close to what our "rational analysis" would lead us to conceptualize. They have no issues with dismissing the evidence.

Taking that sort of position into account... I don't see this "additional rational exercise" being helpful in trying to show a creationist the error of their ways. It seems like the rebuttal would just be another "tree rings worked differently then!!!" kind of denial...

Might be helpful for some of those who are newly on the fence about the subject and just trying to gather more information, though?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 03-18-2014 7:10 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by NoNukes, posted 03-18-2014 6:55 PM Stile has acknowledged this reply
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 03-18-2014 10:46 PM Stile has acknowledged this reply

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9658
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 3.2


(1)
Message 4 of 5 (722226)
03-18-2014 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Stile
03-18-2014 9:24 AM


But... I don't think the argument will have much of an impact on those you would intend to use it for...

I agree. It would not have an impact on people who are cannot even cope with scientific notation or the metric scale. However those arguments do persuade me to laugh, so they are not completely lost.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Stile, posted 03-18-2014 9:24 AM Stile has acknowledged this reply

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18669
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 5 of 5 (722231)
03-18-2014 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Stile
03-18-2014 9:24 AM


My first question was "why an exponential curve?" ...

Well, I saw it as including scientific tentativity, that the possibility could not be absolutely ruled out, never reach zero ... just get very close to zero fairly rapidly the more outrageous the claims.

Taking that sort of position into account... I don't see this "additional rational exercise" being helpful in trying to show a creationist the error of their ways. It seems like the rebuttal would just be another "tree rings worked differently then!!!" kind of denial...

YEC 6,000 year old earth vs current known maximum age 4.55 billion years ... meaning an average apparent aging rate of

4.55x10^9/6x10^3 = 7.58x^5 years per year

so POMM = (1/2)^7.58x^5 = 1.8×10^-228181

Near zero yes?


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Stile, posted 03-18-2014 9:24 AM Stile has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017