Sorry, but I have to speak up
-
But weren't there all kinds of problems (as in not nice like e=mc^2) when quantum and relativity were attempted to be reconciled with each other? Have fun, Paul Westcott.
As far as I know ( I am far removed from the field ) the reconciliation of relativistic and quantum physics is still an ongoing process. More and more however the problems are being seen not as disproving realativity but as proving Hiesenberg. With a bit of the strange quark being thrown in for flavor :). Things like fractional spin and charge, strings ,super strings, multiple demensions, make it seem esoteric but in many cases are just devices used to visualize the problem. Kinda like the diagrams you see of a black hole or a 4 demensional box. We can visualize a one,two or three dem. object pretty well as say a point, a line, a cube. But throw in a fourth and our mind has nothing to relate it too and then we come up with something a tesseract in order to "see" it. But it has no real validity other than conceptual. Any attempt to visualize a singularity ( black hole ) is of course silly as it has no shape or form but the human part of us wants it to have one so we give it one. Richard There is nothing in fiction as strange as what Mother Nature has put together Monarchies, aristocracies, and religions....there was never a country where the majority of the people were in their secret hearts loyal to any of these institutions. Mark Twain - The Mysterious Stranger
-
The universe is so big because God used a char[] array and forgot the NULL terminator. So most of the universe is just any old junk found in memory :-D Michael :-) Logic, my dear Zoe, merely enables one to be wrong with authority. - The Doctor
:laugh: But, if that's true, then we can really mess things up in other places by changing things in our universe. For example, if I clean my room, I've changed the state of the universe, which might lockup the universal computer. Maybe I shouldn't clean my room afterall.
-
Christian Graus wrote: The Bible says there are specific gifts that every Christian recieves from God, the first and foremost being the ability to speak in tongues, because in the Bible, that is what happens when someone becomes a Christian. Que? I thought speaking in tongues was an evil thingTM. Sonorked as well: 100.13197 jorgen FreeBSD is sexy.
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: I thought speaking in tongues was an evil thing Did you ? I guess you've been exposed to a traditional church 'having a form of Godliness but denying the power thereof'. Christian I am completely intolerant of stupidity. Stupidity is, of course, anything that doesn't conform to my way of thinking. - Jamie Hale - 29/05/2002 Half the reason people switch away from VB is to find out what actually goes on.. and then like me they find out that they weren't quite as good as they thought - they've been nannied. - Alex, 13 June 2002
-
Christian Graus wrote: I can't prove a thing. HE can. He never does though does he? In fact, aliens offer more proof they exist than "He" does. In fact, as time goes on, the lack of proof is more evidence that he probably doesn't exist, because the loving God we have heard of, couldn't possibly be ignorant to the suffering of his "children"? Yet suffer we do. Are we to believe he is simply biding his time in order to save the righteous and punish the wicked? How can anyone truly believe this? It's time mankind took responsibility for itself and stopped using religion as a crutch in times of need and an excuse for violence and persecution. "The folly of man is that he dreams of what he can never achieve rather than dream of what he can."
phykell wrote: He never does though does he? Yes, He does. He says 'these signs shall follow them that believe', and they do. Do not confuse the deadness of traditional churches who are far from God, with the absence of God Himself. phykell wrote: because the loving God we have heard of, couldn't possibly be ignorant to the suffering of his "children"? In fact His children are those who follow Him, not all mankind. It is mans choice to walk alone, or to follow Him. It's not His fault if you make bad choices. phykell wrote: Are we to believe he is simply biding his time in order to save the righteous and punish the wicked? The righteous are cared for NOW. The proof is to the individual and it is both tangible and rigidly defined in the Bible. That traditional religion does not teach this is itself a fulfilment of what the Bible says, and so no surprise, but that is what the Bible *does* say. phykell wrote: It's time mankind took responsibility for itself and stopped using religion as a crutch in times of need and an excuse for violence and persecution. Now this I agree with. Christianity is about taking responsibility of ones own actions an aligning them with what God says. It's not about feeling sorry for yourself, being inactive or inflicting hurt on people who disagree. Christian I am completely intolerant of stupidity. Stupidity is, of course, anything that doesn't conform to my way of thinking. - Jamie Hale - 29/05/2002 Half the reason people switch away from VB is to find out what actually goes on.. and then like me they find out that they weren't quite as good as they thought - they've been nannied. - Alex, 13 June 2002
-
But in order to believe you have to be convinced.. right? And what is required to convince you? I'd say you'd have to spell out a theorem which you'd have to prove yourself. The theorem is basically "Do I believe in God?" and may perhaps depend on lemmas such as "Does god exist?", etc. This theorem makes perfect sense in your system (i.e., your mind), but not neccesarily in any other system (enclosing and neighbouring). So I'd say it is a conclusion, because you have to make one in order to prove your own theorem. I'm not saying that you come to the conclusion based on external information, but you do indeed conclude whether you believe before you believe. Sonorked as well: 100.13197 jorgen FreeBSD is sexy.
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: you'd have to spell out a theorem which you'd have to prove yourself * When you fall in love, do you need an explanation to know you are in love with this person ? Don't you know deep in your heart how your feelings are real and how you believe in this love ? Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: "Does god exist?" * My question would be less "Does God exist ?" than "Does Man exist ?" Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: you do indeed conclude whether you believe before you believe. I just know what I feel, I don't need an explanation on everything. There's no conclusion, always the quest. :rose: Y'a cool jouer avec Maradona qui fait tourner gratos dans les vestiaires - Merci Maradona ! - Y'a pas d'quoi ! Ludwig Von 88, "Goal Di Pele"
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Not entirely nude. They usually come with a leaf strategically attached. Oh! That's sad! Blasted leaves!!!
Author of the romantic comedy Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win]
-
Brit wrote: I don't believe that a higher being has to give us definitions of right and wrong in order for them to be real. I did not say your definition of right and wrong was not real. I said it was relative. My example just shows that once your definition of right and wrong is not fixed it opens up the case for others to have different standards. To be conscious that you are ignorant of the facts is a great step towards Knowledge. Benjamin Disraeli
Michael A. Barnhart wrote: I did not say your definition of right and wrong was not real. I said it was relative. My example just shows that once your definition of right and wrong is not fixed it opens up the case for others to have different standards. Well...anyone who doesn't believe in God (or interprets God differently) can have different standards from you. The more fundamental problem with your position is this. Supposing God to exist, it does not follow that his moral standards are correct. Why do you think otherwise? Possibilities: 1. Because you believe that God, by virtue of his role as the creator of the universe, has the right to set moral standards. But why is that? If God had created unthinking robots, that would be one thing. But if he created beings with feelings and a will, what gives him to right to walk all over them, without regard to their opinions and wishes? This view treats human beings as worthless playthings of God. 2. Because you believe that following God's teachings will yield rewards and disobeying them will lead to punishment. In this case, your behaviour is self-interested and people who, say, show kindness without thought of reward are your moral superiors. Moroeover, accepting a morality because of the way it is enforced is a "might is right" philosophy, i.e., morally bankrupt. Of course, faced with an omnipotent being, one might judge that following his dictates is prudent. But this has nothing to do with morality and makes your sense of moral superiority vis a vis the Nazis rather empty. 3. Because you believe that God is all-wise and all-loving and hence his moral rules are the best. Well, if the word "loving" is to have anything like its ordinary meaning, then it is clear that conditions here on earth (and the Bible's predicted conditions for much of the population after death) are not consistent with such a belief. Of course, if one doesn't believe that God exists, then one can do better than these three unappealing choices. John Carson
-
CString s[6][12] char* buff[12][12]; Richard Monarchies, aristocracies, and religions....there was never a country where the majority of the people were in their secret hearts loyal to any of these institutions. Mark Twain - The Mysterious Stranger
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: I thought speaking in tongues was an evil thing Did you ? I guess you've been exposed to a traditional church 'having a form of Godliness but denying the power thereof'. Christian I am completely intolerant of stupidity. Stupidity is, of course, anything that doesn't conform to my way of thinking. - Jamie Hale - 29/05/2002 Half the reason people switch away from VB is to find out what actually goes on.. and then like me they find out that they weren't quite as good as they thought - they've been nannied. - Alex, 13 June 2002
Christian Graus wrote: Did you ? I guess you've been exposed to a traditional church 'having a form of Godliness but denying the power thereof'. Actually, I think I've been exposed to movies where at least one of the characters have been speaking in tongues while begin possessed by the devil. And I have also heard the expression "You speak in tongues" in a derogative way (as if the subject was under the influence of something bad). Sonorked as well: 100.13197 jorgen FreeBSD is sexy.
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: you'd have to spell out a theorem which you'd have to prove yourself * When you fall in love, do you need an explanation to know you are in love with this person ? Don't you know deep in your heart how your feelings are real and how you believe in this love ? Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: "Does god exist?" * My question would be less "Does God exist ?" than "Does Man exist ?" Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: you do indeed conclude whether you believe before you believe. I just know what I feel, I don't need an explanation on everything. There's no conclusion, always the quest. :rose: Y'a cool jouer avec Maradona qui fait tourner gratos dans les vestiaires - Merci Maradona ! - Y'a pas d'quoi ! Ludwig Von 88, "Goal Di Pele"
Karl wrote: * When you fall in love, do you need an explanation to know you are in love with this person ? Don't you know deep in your heart how your feelings are real and how you believe in this love ? I would not need an external explanation to why I feel the way I feel. The symptoms are not obvious at first, but you'll come to the conclusion that it is in fact love. Remember falling in love for the first time - it's a wild ride and you have no clue what the heck is going on. But sooner or later you come to the conclusion that it is in fact love. Karl wrote: * My question would be less "Does God exist ?" than "Does Man exist ?" Why? If you doubt your own existence, then surely the doubt of gods excistence must be bigger? If there is a god who created man, then doubting the existence of man must surely mean doubting god creating man. Karl wrote: I just know what I feel, I don't need an explanation on everything. There's no conclusion, always the quest. Yes. The Quest! You are infact seeking to conclude! You don't want loose ends, for your brain does not want it. I guess that the belief in a higher existence is to shortcircuit a handful of neurons - you don't have to look for the truth yourself - you rely on god. But aren't you just a little bit curious of god? Is he a man with special powers? If not, can he be perceieved as a man with special powers? Is he a man or is god a she? When I die, can I talk to him face-to-face? What does he look like? You have to admit that you have thought something along these lines.. Sonorked as well: 100.13197 jorgen FreeBSD is sexy.
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Not entirely nude. They usually come with a leaf strategically attached. Oh! That's sad! Blasted leaves!!!
Author of the romantic comedy Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win]
Nishant S wrote: Oh! That's sad! Blasted leaves!!! :~ Ssssh! :~ God doesn't want us lowly humans to check out his babes! (Don't even go near Maria! The last time that happened, people got crusified and a whole ethnic group of people have suffered for it ever since!) Sonorked as well: 100.13197 jorgen FreeBSD is sexy.
-
Michael A. Barnhart wrote: I did not say your definition of right and wrong was not real. I said it was relative. My example just shows that once your definition of right and wrong is not fixed it opens up the case for others to have different standards. Well...anyone who doesn't believe in God (or interprets God differently) can have different standards from you. The more fundamental problem with your position is this. Supposing God to exist, it does not follow that his moral standards are correct. Why do you think otherwise? Possibilities: 1. Because you believe that God, by virtue of his role as the creator of the universe, has the right to set moral standards. But why is that? If God had created unthinking robots, that would be one thing. But if he created beings with feelings and a will, what gives him to right to walk all over them, without regard to their opinions and wishes? This view treats human beings as worthless playthings of God. 2. Because you believe that following God's teachings will yield rewards and disobeying them will lead to punishment. In this case, your behaviour is self-interested and people who, say, show kindness without thought of reward are your moral superiors. Moroeover, accepting a morality because of the way it is enforced is a "might is right" philosophy, i.e., morally bankrupt. Of course, faced with an omnipotent being, one might judge that following his dictates is prudent. But this has nothing to do with morality and makes your sense of moral superiority vis a vis the Nazis rather empty. 3. Because you believe that God is all-wise and all-loving and hence his moral rules are the best. Well, if the word "loving" is to have anything like its ordinary meaning, then it is clear that conditions here on earth (and the Bible's predicted conditions for much of the population after death) are not consistent with such a belief. Of course, if one doesn't believe that God exists, then one can do better than these three unappealing choices. John Carson
John Carson wrote: Well...anyone who doesn't believe in God (or interprets God differently) can have different standards from you. That is exactly what I said and I never said you had no right to believe differently. To be conscious that you are ignorant of the facts is a great step towards Knowledge. Benjamin Disraeli