|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 46 (9216 total) |
| |
KING IYK | |
Total: 920,609 Year: 931/6,935 Month: 212/719 Week: 0/204 Day: 0/46 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Peanut Gallery Comments on Great Debate | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9626 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
I wonder if ICANT goes doorknocking for Jesus packing heat.
Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8709 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
I should imagine that with that number of doors one is bound to come across someone from a rival cult who thinks you're a heretic. Better to shoot first and turn the other cheek later.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member (Idle past 344 days) Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: |
Hi Tangle.
Tangle writes: How far through school did you get with your mathematics? Far enough to learn I can make numbers say anything I want them to say. Also I know that the math says the universe had a beginning to exist as the math got to a point called singularity as it made no sense and could not predict anything, or give any information.
Tangle writes: You presented! The balls of the man. Enthropey what is it?
quote:Enthropy definition - Search Tangle could you explain how the law of thermodynamics could be dispensed with so the universe could be eternally existing in the past without being a dead frozen planet by now? God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8709 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
Far enough to learn I can make numbers say anything I want them to say. But not far enough to understand how/why science limits mathematics. Not far enough to understand why the models (math) science uses are productive to an exceptional degree of confidence.
Also I know that the math says the universe had a beginning to exist as the math got to a point called singularity as it made no sense and could not predict anything, or give any information. No, our visible universe is telling us it had an earlier state. The math is just a tool we use to follow where the evidence the universe shows us leads. The "singularity" is not a real thing. It is what we call that area of our ignorance where our models cannot yet follow where the universe is pointing.
how the law of thermodynamics could be dispensed with so the universe could be eternally existing in the past without being a dead frozen planet by now? Entropy as we know it applies only to this, our visible, universe. This is not, as far as we know, an "eternally existing" universe. We have no idea what "universe" came before or if there are others in existence right now. Entropy was exceptionally low in *our* big bang and has been increasing ever since. Our experience of entropy applies *only* to this universe. You can not use entropy to deny the beginning of this, our visible, universe. In fact, the laws of thermodynamics are strong lines of evidence in favor of an inflationary big bang state in both our standard Lambda-CDM model and Penrose's CCC (conformal cyclic cosmology) model of this universe. Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Factio Republicana delenda est.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9626 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
ICANT writes: Far enough to learn I can make numbers say anything I want them to say. Ok, so you left school before learning any at all. That's ok, but it does not make you a credible spokesman for the subject you're pontificating on.
Also I know that the math says the universe had a beginning to exist as the math got to a point called singularity as it made no sense and could not predict anything, or give any information. Be honest ICANT, you have no understanding at all of what the maths means, very very few people have. What you're doing is attempting to impose your own religious interpretation on science's current hypothesises about origins in order to justify an irrational, unevidenced religious belief.
Tangle could you explain how the law of thermodynamics could be dispensed with so the universe could be eternally existing in the past without being a dead frozen planet by now? No I could not, like you I am not a physicist. Unlike you I understand that I can't pontificate on subjects I have no knowledge of. But if I could explain it too you, you would not be able to understand it but would reject it because it does not conform to your beliefs. But as this is a PRATT, I can point you to an answer provided by those that are qualified to answer it. Claim CF101: The first law of thermodynamics says matter/energy cannot come from nothing. Therefore, the universe itself could not have formed naturally. (See also CE440: Origin of everything.)Source: Brown, Walt, 1995. In the beginning: Compelling evidence for creation and the Flood. Phoenix, AZ: Center for Scientific Creation, p. 21.Response: Formation of the universe from nothing need not violate conservation of energy. The gravitational potential energy of a gravitational field is a negative energy. When all the gravitational potential energy is added to all the other energy in the universe, it might sum to zero (Guth 1997, 9-12,271-276; Tryon 1973).References: Guth, Alan H., 1997. (see below)Tryon, Edward P., 1973. Is the universe a vacuum fluctuation? Nature 246: 396-397. Further Reading: Guth, Alan H., 1997. The Inflationary Universe. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. CF101: Origin of the UniverseJe suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member (Idle past 344 days) Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: |
Hi Tangle,
Tangle writes: Be honest ICANT, you have no understanding at all of what the maths means, I got into the study of Calculus and decided I would never need it and went no further with it. Math is not a dimension in the universe. It is a product of the mind of mankind. So to get to singularity there has to be several assumptions made and numbers applied to events. If the assumptions are wrong then any outcome will be wrong.
Tangle writes: What you're doing is attempting to impose your own religious interpretation on science's current hypothesises about origins in order to justify an irrational, unevidenced religious belief. Why would I need to impose my religious interpretation of science's current hypothesis? Did the universe have a beginning to exist? According to Stephen Hawking it did.
quote:The page you were looking for doesn't exist (404) Stephen Hawking stated in his lecture on the beginning of time that the beginning of the universe would be determined by the laws of physics. That would include the first and second laws of thermodynamics.
quote:First law of thermodynamics - Wikipedia quote:Second law of thermodynamics - Wikipedia quote: Entropy is the condition caused by energy being used to do work and total energy is always reduced by this mechanical work. ENTROPY | meaning, definition in Cambridge English Dictionary Since energy cannot be created it must be eternal in existence, or there has to be a never ending source of energy. Lawrence Krausshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h43G83o5kc Postulates a universe created from nothing. But his nothing turns out to be something.About 9 minutes into the video states that Hubble discovered that the universe was expanding away from us in all directions. Then about 37 minutes into the video he states the universe is flat. That being the case it is not expanding away from us in all directions. To me that means he contradicts himself and Hubble. Later he tells us the universe is either curved, flat, or round. Then stating that a flat universe is the only one that could be a zero energy universe and start from his nothing. About 38 minutes into the video. From what I can determine from listening to the video and reading about his book he qualifies nothingness, though, to mean empty space, and then he fills that empty space with matter and antimatter ruled by the laws of quantum physics.
Tangle writes: But if I could explain it too you, you would not be able to understand it but would reject it because it does not conform to your beliefs. What I have referenced above has nothing to do with what I believe. It only has to do with what physicist has had to say. Did I misunderstand what they said? If so please explain where I fell overboard.
Tangle writes: The first law of thermodynamics says matter/energy cannot come from nothing. Therefore, the universe itself could not have formed naturally Yes that is what I said so that makes what I said and your source in agreement.
Tangle writes: Brown, Walt, 1995. In the beginning: Compelling evidence for creation and the Flood. Yes I have read all about Walt Browns hydroplate theory and I don't think any more about his theory that I do Ellen G. White's theory. They are both a bunch of garbage and not related to what the Hebrew Bible teaches. So when you are talking to me you are not talking to someone who believes in a young universe. In fact science guess of 13 + billion years old is way off from how old the universe is. According to science energy has to have existed for eternity past as it can not be created, according to the laws of physics. So there has to be an endless energy supply for the universe and us to exist. If you disagree give me your reasoning and don't give me the excuse it is above your pay grade. You have common sense and an education and should be able to make those kinds of decisions simply by looking at the facts.
Tangle writes: Formation of the universe from nothing need not violate conservation of energy. What does conservation of energy have to do with the creation of the universe? Creating the universe from no thing would have the problem of creating energy which can not be done according to the laws of physics.
Tangle writes: The gravitational potential energy of a gravitational field is a negative energy. When all the gravitational potential energy is added to all the other energy in the universe, it might sum to zero Yes Guth did put forth a zero energy universe. How many scientist agreed with him? Krauss also puts forth a zero energy universe. But states that universe would be a flat universe. According to Hubble's discovery that the universe was expanding from us in all directions disagrees with them as that requires a closed universe. So observations require the universe to be a closed system which had a beginning to exist from an absence of anything. There would be no energy, branes, fluctuations, or vacuum, for anything to pop into existence in to be the beginning of the universe. Now if you disagree with anything I have said above would you take time to copy and paste the entire message in a reply and underneath the parts you disagree with insert your comments starting with your name so I won't get confused about what you are answering. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9626 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
ICANT writes: I got into the study of Calculus and decided I would never need it and went no further with it. Calculus is age 16 maths and you didn't even manage that. Now you're trying to lecture us in cosmological physics. Why should anyone listen to a word you say? Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member (Idle past 344 days) Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: |
Hi AZ,
AZPaul writes: But not far enough to understand how/why science limits mathematics. Science does not limit numbers. They are limitless. Science does limit the minds that insert the numbers into formulas the mind makes from their assumptions.
AZPaul writes: The "singularity" is not a real thing. I thought I pointed out that singularity was a place where the math does not work as it becomes useless. I did not try to give the reasons the math does not work.
AZPaul writes: Entropy as we know it applies only to this, our visible, universe. Actually Stephen Hawking said the beginning of this universe would be governed by the laws of Physics in his lecture of "The Beginning of Time". Found here: The page you were looking for doesn't exist (404) God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member (Idle past 344 days) Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: |
Hi Tangle,
Tangle writes: Calculus is age 16 maths and you didn't even manage that. Now you're trying to lecture us in cosmological physics. Why should anyone listen to a word you say? Actually I was 12 at the time. I am not trying to lecture you on anything. If I was I would be sticking to the Bible. What I have done is presented quotes from Physics and pointed out reasons that some of their conclusions is not a possibility. I asked you and anyone else on this website to either straighten me out on my understanding of what they have said and the places they contradict themselves. That does not seem to me to be a hard thing to do. But jumping up on your soap box and talking down to me like I have no education when the lowest grade I ever got in school was a B and I only got one of them in 16 years of schooling, is not going to cut it. I have to explain the Bible and answer question of high school and college students in simple words so don't let my simple questions stump you. I gave you a very lengthy post and ask you to point out my short comings. And this message is all you are going to comment on. Don't waste my time. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9626 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
ICANT writes: Actually I was 12 at the time. Right so you didn't understand calculus at the age of 12. Probably not at 10 either. Or 8. But actually, not at any age at all, yet you think you can talk about big physics. And write a book on it too! Actually what you do is read physics explainers and cherry pick from it. It's fake physics.
But jumping up on your soap box and talking down to me like I have no education when the lowest grade I ever got in school was a B and I only got one of them in 16 years of schooling, is not going to cut it. I'm afraid it does cut it and you know it. You have no post school education at all do you? You wouldn't know where to start if you were presented with a real physics problem. And, as it happens neither would I, but at least I know that I'm not qualified to argue the subject and that skim reading half understood pop physics will not make me able.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 729 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
ICANT writes:
We can explain to each other where you go wrong but nobody can explain it to you because you can't see past your huge ego. I asked you and anyone else on this website to either straighten me out on my understanding of what they have said and the places they contradict themselves. That does not seem to me to be a hard thing to do."I'm Fallen and I can't get up!"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8709 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
Science does not limit numbers. They are limitless. This has nothing to do with this discussion. Science limits the mathematics that can be used. The "numbers" I refer to are the formulae. The equations of physics. The models physics builds from observation. You say you know enough math to make the numbers say anything you want. But, science limits the mathematics. No matter how much you may fiddle your numbers and want there to be 12 eggs you are strictly limited to 4 if the science says there are only 4.
Actually Stephen Hawking said the beginning of this universe would be governed by the laws of Physics That is right. And that includes entropy. And that is limited, as are all the laws of this universe as far as we can tell, to operating in this our visible universe. And all that means that this our visible universe had a beginning some 13.8 billion years ago and no amount of misapplication of those laws is going to change that fact. No one knows what happened or what systems operated prior to the planck time (10-44) Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Factio Republicana delenda est.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member (Idle past 344 days) Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: |
Hi AZ,
AZPaul3 writes:
Are you sure the scientist and the facts are not what limits the numbers.
Science limits the mathematics that can be used. AZ writes: I refer to are the formulae. Formulae's are created by scientist and mathematicians according to their assumptions.
AZ writes: No matter how much you may fiddle your numbers and want there to be 12 eggs you are strictly limited to 4 if the science says there are only 4. Science has nothing to do with there only being 4 eggs in the basket if you only put 4 eggs in the basket. The fact that there is 4 eggs in the basket determines how many eggs are in the basket.
AZ writes: That is right. And that includes entropy. And that is limited, as are all the laws of this universe as far as we can tell, to operating in this our visible universe. Read his statement carefully. He says the beginning of the universe will be controlled by the law of Physics. That means the laws of Physics was in effect before there was any energy because that energy would be controlled by the laws of Physics. Which would mean that the energy used to create the universe had to be created. Which the laws of Physics says can not happen.
AZ writes: No one knows what happened or what systems operated prior to the planck time (10-44) Do we not know or just refuse to accept the facts. We know one thing. There had to be existence and in that existence there had to be enough energy to create the universe we have today, according to the laws of Physics. "Energy can not be created or destroyed." God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member (Idle past 344 days) Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: |
Hi ringo,
ringo writes: We can explain to each other where you go wrong but nobody can explain it to you because you can't see past your huge ego. Lets start small and see if you can help. The laws of Physics says energy can not be created or destroyed. I believe that says energy can not be created or destroyed.Since energy can not be created or destroyed it has to have existed eternally in the past. Where is my belief wrong. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18706 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
Adding my 2 cents:
jar always argues that the Content is preferable and that the SOURCE is irrelevant. My argument is that both SOURCE and CONTENT are valuable and indeed necessary.. One cannot have math if nothing existed at one time. (or before time, technically) And AZ, I know you have a rational mind and that you and the critical thinkers here never use God as an initial premise. I wont fault you for that, but I dont want you ridiculing those of us who DO believe that. And ICANT, I hope that your knee is doing better. I can only imagine what I will feel like if God grants me another 25 years. Im 60 now and I realize that getting old is not for sissies. The only way I know to drive out evil from the country is by the constructive method of filling it with good.Calvin Coolidge "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.-RC Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith - You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do. Anne Lamott I Have Strong Arguments Which I Cant Say To You~CG
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025