|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: rational people only (no yecs) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joz Inactive Member |
quote: First this is wrong Einstein had c constant in all inertial reference frames, i.e if you measure c standing still or moving you will always get the same answer....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joz Inactive Member |
quote: You have unfortunately failed to take into account this wee little thing called Heisenburgs uncertainty principle.... Your view is one commonly put forwad by the empiricists of the 19th century who believed that witha proper derivation of all the laws and proper observations of the matter they acted on the future states of the system could be calculated..... It was all looking rosy until quantum mechanics came along and put an inherant limit on our knowledge.....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
doctrbill Member (Idle past 2793 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: |
Topical discussions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
i guess my theory is wrong... oh well- at least i was thinking out of the box
BTW- i have now done research on the special theory of relativity and understand it completely.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joz Inactive Member |
quote: I doubt that you understand it completely after a (necessarily) less than 1/2 hour study of the subject... Also its only one special case of general relativity which is a whole lot more interesting.... [This message has been edited by joz, 03-09-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Darwin Storm Inactive Member |
Realitivy has the same inherent weakness in it as quantum mechanics. From what I have read, they work well for their respective scales, but run into problems when they broach into the opposite side of the spectrum. If I remember correctly, gravity at the quantum level seems to be a major stumbling block. My friend at UCSD was telling me something about gravity doing very strange things at that level.
I am really fascinated on both subjects, but am still early in my reseach into both theories.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
well cut me a little slack
i'm 12 years old for god's sake!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"there are plenty of people who believe that the laws of physics were created randomly during the big bang. but then again, the big bang never happened."
--As you can observe from my post, this is not what I was addressing, ie, the point of the big bang. However, I was addressing your point that 'they did not exist in a vaccume' as it's support. ------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cobra_snake Inactive Member |
quote: A more appropriate title may have been "All who agree with the Big Bang" rather than singling out YEC's as irrational.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"BTW- i have now done research on the special theory of relativity and understand it completely."
--I have seen books in university libraries thousands of pages in length, and even in some cases, series of books on the subject (though usually also encompassing quantum mechanics). If my interest in quantum force or cosmology and cosmogeny, I would perhaps take the time to read them. ------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
refresh problem again
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
i'm sorry-
i guess i stated it incorrectly... i understand the underlying concepts completely of course, i don't know all the technical details.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1507 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
quote: The laws of physics did not spring into being ... ever. They are creations of man which describe the observed behavioursof the matter and energy within our limits of observation. quote: Time doesn't actually exist at all. It is convenient for us tointerpret out perceptions of the universe against a passage of time. Try measuring time. By that I mean get a like-for-like comparision the way we do withlength or mass. Read 'Slaughterhouse five' by Kurt Vonnegut ... I know it'sfiction, but he has an interesting slant on time [This message has been edited by Peter, 03-11-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1507 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
quote: If you are really only 12 ... keep thinking ... you'repretty good at it already. Read lot's too ... you always need something to think on. .. and enter debates that challenge the intellect ... oh you are ..er .. that's good then
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jennacreationist Inactive Member |
I actually understand your reasonning, but then doesn't your theory leave room for God?
because if "we are evolving into something other than what we are currently" then isn't it feasible to have a being a Creator that is more "evolved" and far more intelligent than those of us who are on earth? See it is not so far fetched after all. I don't understand why no one would believe me if I said that my computer came from a matter that randomly and over time created itself and evolved from a tic tac, something that is also inanimate, yet people of such great and wonderfully God given intelligence truly want to believe that any living matter even a microbe came from a non-living non source of nothing to form our beautiful land, seas, skies let alone an actual functionning breathing without thinking human being. The Bible is full of Science and I know that it can be proven that their is a heavenly Father by using the scientific method. I am a Biology major by brain and a Christian by heart. They can go hand in hand , not opposing beleifs but one and the same. Have a great Day~ Jenn~
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024