Dawkins / The Root of All Evil (merged) (3 Viewers)

[1000smurfs]

but how can you deny the existence of something that has no definition, either in a classical way or a personal way? .

Again the burden of proof is on the people who would have me believe
in their flying spahgetti monster

i can't deny his existence

 

[nofriendo]

Again the burden of proof is on the people who would have me believe
in their flying spahgetti monster

i can't deny his existence

God i love the flying spaghetti monster!!!

 

[1000smurfs]

Goddam you and your replies!! One relies on gravity the other relies on the strong, weak and electromagnetic forces (the other 3 forces aka the standard model) which does not use gravity at all. Is that not contradictory!

Em, no! both theories do fantastic jobs of explaining their domains of validity.
The standard model - the very small
General Relativity - the very large

Wasnt this the reason the unified theory/supersymmetry exists, to allow both theories to work together.

i think supersymmetry is required in the first place for standard GUTS, ie
before even considering gravity. 'unified theory' could refer to lots of things. But quantum gravity is i think what you are getting at.
Uniting the two theories is diffcult , especially outside their domains of
validity. You could maybe say they are contradictory in certain assumptions they make eg Quantum field theory presupposes a flat spacetime background. They also use different paradigms in their conception of what a force is. But this is more that one or the other of them is incomplete. It's unfair to just declare them contradictory without
going into the details of the problems. people will get the wrong idea!

 

[nofriendo]

I think we should ask this guy!
http://www.sns.ias.edu/~witten/

 

[1000smurfs]

Quantum field theory presupposes a flat spacetime background.

in fact you can do quantum field theory ( what the standard model is based on) on a curved spactime background (what general relativity is about).and you get out some results which are the basis for a lot of theory regarding black holes and inflationary expansion . The results are plausible , not ridiculous as you would expect
if there were nasty contradictions lurking.

 

[1000smurfs]

I think we should ask this guy!
http://www.sns.ias.edu/~witten/

He'll give you million dollars if you can solve his weight problem!

Or the clay institute will anyway

 

[nofriendo]

in fact you can do quantum field theory ( what the standard model is based on) on a curved spactime background (what general relativity is about).and you get out some results which are the basis for a lot of theory regarding black holes and inflationary expansion . The results are plausible , not ridiculous as you would expect
if there were nasty contradictions lurking.

Point taken!

 

[nofriendo]

He'll give you million dollars if you can solve his weight problem!

Or the clay institute will anyway

Grand i was looking for something to do over the weekend!

 

[1000smurfs]

Firstly i am in no way religious! but it i do believe that it is nessesary!! A large number of people take their moral standing from religion (be they good or bad). If someone could come out tomorrow and absolutely without question rule out god! There would be chaos!!! from an emotional standpoint yeah i have friends/family who have gotten through tragedies purely on faith alone! but i must admit to a giggle when the auld "hes in a better place line" comes out

Where do you get your moral standing from ?

 

[Rogue]

GAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!

There's a Horizon programme on right now on BBC2 about ID, it's a good programme but everytime I see Michael Behe or one of his crowd it just makes me really angry. That they can't see the fundamental flaw of their viewpoint is mind-boggling.

again: GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRAERTVwelkrugnjbacxkuyfgasnoxuyg!!!!!!1

 

[Rogue]

That was great!

I feel much better now; Dawkins was righteous but in a good way, Sir David Attenborough was an outstanding communicator and really got the point home, Kenneth miller though just kicked ass!

 

[1000smurfs]

That was great!

I feel much better now; Dawkins was righteous but in a good way, Sir David Attenborough was an outstanding communicator and really got the point home, Kenneth miller though just kicked ass!

Agreed ! Miller is my new hero.

hehe i went through the same emotions as you too, started off feeling uh-oh
now i'm all warm and fuzzy

 

[nofriendo]

Where do you get your moral standing from ?

Like many Irish i was brought up catholic converted to flying spaghetti monster of course!!

You should check this out
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html

 

[1000smurfs]

Like many Irish i was brought up catholic converted to flying spaghetti monster of course!!

You should check this out
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html

aw cool i didn't realise this was on the web, cheers. Both his books 'the elegant universe 'and
'the fabric of the cosmos' are brilliant. The latter
especially is a great intro to relativity, quantum mechanics and cosmology.

 

[nofriendo]

Yeah, there is a way to download them but its a pain in the ass. Greenes books are great you should read the road to reality by penrose its good as well!

 

[snakybus]

But what about when religion interferes with science? should they be silent then?

Oh for fuck's sake. I didn't say they should be silent.

this thread has been infected with the "stupid" meme

 

[MDR]

Stupidity doesn't occur through your genetic make-up: it's learned.

 

[billygannon]

there would still be constraints on how advanced these civilisations
could get. God/heaven/hell for me would be something which acts acausally, supernaturally without reagrd for physical law.

it's a fun idea, i'd rather imagine personal physical heavens though.

Also scientists can't definitely prove soimething doesn't exist, the burden
of proof is on you if you want me to subscribe to your unicorn based religion.

Actually, the likelihood is that there are other parallel universeses with entirely different laws of physics. So there are universes where supernatural beings, or beings we'd consider supernatural, exist and act completely in accordance to the laws of physics of that universe.
And surely Gamma rays have a power that breaks our own laws of physics? Albeit for a couple of seconds.

Now... M Theory offers a solution to the singularity, but it leaves the question as to how did the very first membranes in the 11th dimension?

And something I was thinking about on the train into work is do we exist in some way in other dimensions within our own universe. Is there a conscious self within the 6th, 8th or 9th dimension. And is there a conscious self existing in some way in the 11th dimension?

 

[billygannon]

There's a cracking set of articles about Religion and belief in the New Scientist this week.

One of the articles suggests that religion is actually good for you - people who engage in communal religious acts actually live longer and are happier than people who don't.

 

[nofriendo]

Now... M Theory offers a solution to the singularity, but it leaves the question as to how did the very first membranes in the 11th dimension?

God created it!