|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 2956 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: gravity | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10044 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
So Oser, in my opinion does not make a good case in his criticisms as he assumes anyone who does not believe as he does in wrong. The irony is that you reject Oser's claims because they conflict with your beliefs, and anyone who does not believe as you do is wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2956 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Paulk writes: Time exists at the earliest point in time by your definition. by human definition. Oser's point is reasonable only if you believe there is no other option than naturalism. Naturalism necessitates there is no supernatual being. If there is a supernatural being beyond time as we know it, then it is obvious that a supernatural being that created this universe, was before the time of this universe. "I AM" means God was before there was you, before our universe, before anything we can ever try to learn.
To predate a thing it is necessary to exist at an earlier point in time. There can be no point in time earlier than the earliest point in time by definition. Oser's point seems entirely reasonable. Can you come up with a real objection rather than just assuming that it is wrong
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2956 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Taq writes:
The irony is that you reject Oser's claims because they conflict with your beliefs, and anyone who does not believe as you do is wrong. And you reject Schroeder's claims because you disagree with his beliefs, and anyone who does not believe as you do is wrong. Perhaps you should read Paul Davies, "the Goldilocks Enigma", written subsequent to Schroeder that supports the same postion. Davies is a Physicist with outstanding credientials. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9143 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
Perhaps you should read Paul Davies, "the Goldilocks Enigma", written subsequent to Schroeder that supports the same postion.
Perhaps you should understand the things you post about. Davies does not in any way support a "supernatural" answer for anything. From Davies himself.
quote: Yes, the universe looks like a fix. But that doesn't mean that a god fixed it Care to try again?Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8536 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0
|
quote: You didn't read the reviews, did you. This is not some difference in philosophy or world view. This is a glaring error of fact in known physics; an absurdity that a competent physicist could not possibly make. Don't give me any of this "errors are not black or white or accepted by all physicists" bullshit. This is just flat out incompetent. Period. Schroeder is not a resource you want to use. There must be a competent physicist on your side of the street somewhere. I suggest you drop Schroeder and go find him.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
But don't lay people have the responsibility to read what qualifed experts opinions are and then make a rationale decision as to who is correct? If they have such a responsibility it is a responsibility more often breached than observed. Do you believe that people shoulder that responsibility outside of a courtroom? What per cent of people have an informed scientific opinion on global warming or any other scientific question? I suspect that most people have not done any kind of weighing of evidence to form their opinions. Lay people form opinions because that's we people do. Often those opinions are uninformed, contrary to the evidence, irrational and wrong. Sometimes the opinions are correct for illogical reasons. In fact, lay people get things wrong often enough that we don't leave certain questions, (for example patent claim constructions) to juries, because injustice results.
I as a person who believes in the God of the Roman Catholic church take umbage when a scientists writes in a review that only 20% of physicists are theists. What revelance does that have to a scientific issue? Was that Oser's most significant criticism? I don't think so. In my opinion Oser pointed to a number of substantial logical flaws in Schroeder's arguments. Of course those flaws don't prove that Schroeder is wrong, but they do dismiss the claim that his conclusions are inevitable.
What revelance does that have to a scientific issue? Ultimately, Shroeder's argument is not scientific. The question of how many physicists are theists is relevant to whether Schroeder's arguments are compelling to other scientists. If we were actually having a jury decide this issue, a mechanism that I think is inappropriate, then the weight of scientific opinion is relevant.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. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Time exists at the earliest point in time by your definition. by human definition. Oser's point is reasonable only if you believe there is no other option than naturalism. In other words, you reach Schroeder's result by assuming the answer to the question at hand. You might well be right, but your thought process is not logical. You are reaching your result because of your religious belief. That's fine, but that is not what Schroeder is purporting to do. Further, Oser does not argue that time must have been created with the universe only that Schroeder completely dismisses this possibility without giving any reason. Added by Edit:
If there is a supernatural being beyond time as we know it, then it is obvious that a supernatural being that created this universe, was before the time of this universe. Is this really the only possibility? I don't think your conclusion follows from the premise that there is a supernatural being beyond time, but perhaps you've simply skipped a few steps in the syllogism. How about filling those in for me? I actually do believe that God created the universe. What I do not believe is that you can prove or disprove such a thing scientifically. Further, you don't appear to be making any attempt to do so, or to defend Schroeder's attempt at doing so. So what exactly are you arguing here? Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.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. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: If you consider yourself to be non-human and assign different meanings to words that doesn't make Oser wrong, that just makes you incapable of understanding Oser's point. Or are you claiming that Oser isn't human, uses a different language, and therefore doesn't mean what he seems to say ?
quote: No, it doesn't assume naturalism at all.
quote: And that is only possibly true if there was a TIME before this universe.Oser's point stands. quote: It might do in your made-up "non-human" language. However, as an English phrase it has an English meaning and that isn't what you say. Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3641 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
Scot Osser' s opinion in his Shroeder's critique, that energy could be the result of matter or that matter and energy are equivalent as regards sequence, seems to me wrong.As we go from biggest to smallest, e.g from peripheral to central, from the end result to the beggining,we see matter ending to quantons e.g energy.Sroeder's view seems more propable.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Scot Osser' s opinion in his Shroeder's critique, that energy could be the result of matter or that matter and energy are equivalent as regards sequence, seems to me wrong. What form would energy without matter take? 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. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1526 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
mushroom?
"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1526 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined:
|
shadow71 writes: My question is, are there any theories as to How Gravity come into existence? One other postulation is that our universe is like a bubble bumping along the membrane of another universe's membrane.Gravity is leaking into our universe from the other universe. Which could explain why gravity is such a weak force compared to the other fundamental interactive forces. All the other fundamental forces have a mediator associated with it, but such a mediator has yet to be discovered for gravity ie: the graviton. It is still a mystery to be sure, but to lable it supernatural or metaphysical just because we do not yet have a explanation is a antiquated way of explaining things. imo."You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8536 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
horta?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8536 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
Scot Osser' s opinion in his Shroeder's critique, that energy could be the result of matter or that matter and energy are equivalent as regards sequence, seems to me wrong.As we go from biggest to smallest, e.g from peripheral to central, from the end result to the beggining,we see matter ending to quantons e.g energy.Sroeder's view seems more propable.
Emotional distaste and what "seems" right or wrong to you or me make no difference. This is one reason why actual competent physicists determine these things, not amateurs.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
horta? I don't understand your answer. There are answers to my question. Energy can be propagated in fields without propagating matter. The idea was to start a discussion that would shed light on zi ko's errors.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. 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
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024