Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Proposed Proof That The Origin of The Universe Cannot Be Scientifically Explained
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 121 of 220 (675295)
10-10-2012 2:29 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by 1.61803
10-09-2012 5:38 PM


Re: Explanations and more
However, it may very well come down to that. At some level, reality may be bound to some basic, simplistic statement.
Quite so. But this statement, by virtue of being "basic" will itself lack any further explanation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by 1.61803, posted 10-09-2012 5:38 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 122 of 220 (675306)
10-10-2012 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 119 by Dr Adequate
10-09-2012 4:00 PM


Re: Explanations and more
Dr Adequate writes:
But "by definition" is a different sort of answer to a different sort of question. It's not the sort of answer you could give to a question about the causes of things.
Again, exactly.
We're talking about the beginning of the universe. It is not known that the universe must have "a cause."
I'm talking about a "By definition" answer, a "just so" explanation for a possible situation that would likely include the universe's creation not having a cause. Therefore the question wouldn't be about "the causes of things."
To answer the second question, we'd have to talk about things like slavery and the Confederacy and the Civil War.
I understand. But, as with your previous example about the explanation for diamonds being about what causes diamonds... all your examples seem to hinge on the assumption that the universe must have a cause. But what if it doesn't?
I agree that if we can somehow ascertain that the universe must necessarily have a cause, then it is impossible for the scientific method to explain that cause. (Then again, if we could know that, wouldn't we then know something about that cause?...) But that's not the situation I'm talking about. It doesn't seem rational to bring up example after example about things that have obvious causes to show that an explanation about the universe's creation cannot be explained because we don't know if the universe's creation must have a cause. The examples do not necessarily apply.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-09-2012 4:00 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-14-2012 3:26 AM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 3966 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 123 of 220 (675442)
10-11-2012 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Tangle
09-26-2012 8:25 AM


If Prof. Hawking should try to defy logic in practical matters,- drive for example his wheelchair across M25 full of heavy traffic, he would be crashed to death. Just like any one else. That is a fond idea many people got that as long as you say that this is science you can talk any nonsense and get away with it.
So, Prof. Hawking should learn elementary arithmetic and logic. A claim that the whole of existence can possibly spontaneously arise from nothing is like an attempt to multiply zero by zero. Quadrillions to the quadrillionth power of quackademics like the professor can repeat the operation an indefinitely great number of times. The result will be the same old zero every single time any of the luminaries may try.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Tangle, posted 09-26-2012 8:25 AM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by vimesey, posted 10-11-2012 12:13 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied
 Message 127 by subbie, posted 10-11-2012 3:15 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


(2)
Message 124 of 220 (675443)
10-11-2012 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Alfred Maddenstein
10-11-2012 11:51 AM


Professor Hawking is dealing with matters in relation to which elemetary arithmetic and everyday logic have absolutely nothing to do. Yet again, you don't understand something (deep physics and cosmology), and therefore dismiss it as incorrect.
Perhaps I can explain this way. You are presented with a novel that is written in, say, French. You are effectively saying that the author is writing gibberish, because you don't understand French.
Now, when it comes to deep physics and cosmology, there's no shame in not understanding it. I don't have anything more than a rudimentary grasp of the real basics of it, and I'm not ashamed. But I am bright enough not to dismiss it as incorrect - to do that, I would have to have an incredible depth of knowledge of the field, and be more visionary than a whole host of really bright people. That I am not.
To dismiss Hawking and any other physicist, you need the deep maths (which goes waaaay beyond basic arithmetic). In just the same way as you would first need to be able to speak French, before you could dismiss as gibberish a book which purports to be written in French.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-11-2012 11:51 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-11-2012 12:42 PM vimesey has replied

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 3966 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 125 of 220 (675451)
10-11-2012 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by vimesey
10-11-2012 12:13 PM


Sorry, all that is just your irrelevant opinion. There is no such things as deep or shallow physics and cosmology. Some propositions are rational and some are contradictions in terms. The professor's statement is of the second variety. Sorry. The venerable professor has got no immunity from scrutiny. He's found to be talking egregious nonsense often enough. There is no need for deep maths to understand that nothing is zero by definition and if it is any other value then the value represents something and when there is something, there is something else necessarily by which that something is defined and known. A whole lot of it. Otherwise the feline speaks lovely French which like maths is a language that can be very well translated in other languages. Gibberish in the original translates into gibberish only. In any language. Sorry again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by vimesey, posted 10-11-2012 12:13 PM vimesey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by vimesey, posted 10-11-2012 1:00 PM Alfred Maddenstein has not replied

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


(1)
Message 126 of 220 (675452)
10-11-2012 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by Alfred Maddenstein
10-11-2012 12:42 PM


Oh, I have no illusions about the relevance of my opinions to the field of physics.
But then, I'm an intelligent chap with a reasonable level of humility.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-11-2012 12:42 PM Alfred Maddenstein has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 127 of 220 (675482)
10-11-2012 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Alfred Maddenstein
10-11-2012 11:51 AM


That is a fond idea many people got that as long as you say that this is science you can talk any nonsense and get away with it.
Not surprisingly, you got that 180 degrees backwards.
If someone says something is scientific, there is a well-established set of criteria to assess the accuracy of the statement, and a large contingent of people well-versed in science to test it. On the other hand, if someone says something is religious, or spiritual, or new age, or alternative, or any of a host of other ill-defined mush-brained concepts, there's no real way to evaluate the truth of what they say within those "disciplines" because none of them have any method for determining the accuracy of their claims.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-11-2012 11:51 AM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-13-2012 12:08 PM subbie has replied

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 3966 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 128 of 220 (675621)
10-13-2012 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by subbie
10-11-2012 3:15 PM


No, anything that is labelled or sounds as spiritual, religious, new age or alternative has no much credibility with the modern ape to begin with so is no contender as its main current supplier of mass superstition and nonsense. The demand for absurd ideas to believe in is as great as ever and as ever the nonsense to be believed must be known to have come from a credible and reputable source and only the label "scientific" can nowadays satisfy that customer requirement. If it was the Catholic Church, hippies or scientologists spreading the beliefs in black holes, dark energy, time travel etc., the beliefs would have been but minor and marginal. Yet since the nonsense is known to come from the trusted and venerated science these examples of ludicrous superstition are major and global with those holding them as dear gospel found in any country in the modern world.
Edited by Alfred Maddenstein, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by subbie, posted 10-11-2012 3:15 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by jar, posted 10-13-2012 12:34 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied
 Message 130 by subbie, posted 10-13-2012 12:40 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 129 of 220 (675622)
10-13-2012 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Alfred Maddenstein
10-13-2012 12:08 PM


Topic
While absolutely nothing in your post has anything to do with the topic, your post does raise the question of whether or not you have ever heard of Monseigneur Georges Lematre?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-13-2012 12:08 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-13-2012 1:06 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 130 of 220 (675623)
10-13-2012 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Alfred Maddenstein
10-13-2012 12:08 PM


No, anything that is labelled or sounds as spiritual, religious, new age or alternative has no much credibility with the modern ape to begin with....
You literally have no idea what's happening in the world, do you?
Does any of this mean anything to you:
Homeopathy
Deepak Chopra
Chiropractic
Astrology
Crystals
Acupuncture
Faith healing
Tarot reading
Ufologists
Ear candling
Aroma therapy
Psychics
Intercessory prayer
Dowsing
Telepathy
Near death experiences
Out of body experiences
Antivaxers
Birthers
9/11 truthers
Edited by subbie, : Thought of a few more

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-13-2012 12:08 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-13-2012 6:09 PM subbie has replied

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 3966 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 131 of 220 (675624)
10-13-2012 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by jar
10-13-2012 12:34 PM


Re: Topic
Yes, the cat reads French so he had the pleasure of reading the abb's tales in the original. The same goes for Alexander Friedman - the other inventor of the spacetime creation metric. Russian is no secret to the feline.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by jar, posted 10-13-2012 12:34 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 3966 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 132 of 220 (675638)
10-13-2012 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by subbie
10-13-2012 12:40 PM


What is your point with this list, sub? Do you get your belief supply from anything on the list? I bet not, I bet you look elsewhere. But that was exactly my point. These suppliers are not credible enough for you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by subbie, posted 10-13-2012 12:40 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by subbie, posted 10-13-2012 11:54 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 133 of 220 (675641)
10-13-2012 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by Alfred Maddenstein
10-13-2012 6:09 PM


But they are more credible for most of the population than science is.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-13-2012 6:09 PM Alfred Maddenstein has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-14-2012 4:30 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 134 of 220 (675647)
10-14-2012 3:26 AM
Reply to: Message 122 by Stile
10-10-2012 9:44 AM


Re: Explanations and more
I understand. But, as with your previous example about the explanation for diamonds being about what causes diamonds... all your examples seem to hinge on the assumption that the universe must have a cause. But what if it doesn't?
No, I didn't assume that the universe must have a cause. But if it doesn't, then that leaves it rather hard to explain. There's a reason for the cause in because.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Stile, posted 10-10-2012 9:44 AM Stile has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by NoNukes, posted 10-14-2012 9:51 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 135 of 220 (675664)
10-14-2012 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by Dr Adequate
10-14-2012 3:26 AM


Re: Explanations and more
But if it doesn't, then that leaves it rather hard to explain. There's a reason for the cause in because.
Alpha decay does not have a cause. But we have a detailed explanation for alpha decay. If a phenomenon does not have a cause, then its explanation simply does not include a description of causation.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.
Well, you may still have time to register to vote. Even North Carolinians can still register for early voting. State Registration Deadlines

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-14-2012 3:26 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Dogmafood, posted 10-14-2012 11:23 AM NoNukes has replied
 Message 137 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-14-2012 1:32 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024