Re: religion

Defaultuser wrote: 
"Alistair" <alistair@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
<snip>

Negative energy is a concept that is required by Quantum Mechanics and the
Uncertainty Principle.



Is it just me that finds the irony in a discussion about the God and evolution evolving into a conversation about the Big Bang Theory as a *sound* alternative...

As a basis is has an "uncertainty principle"....it requires a level of mathematics that is studied by post doctoral mathematics, physics and cosmology students....and is changing constantly as new things are "discovered".

I don't know that I find the human interpretation of measuring and analysing any more accurate on the scientific level than I do the spiritual level. Last time I checked, Einstein (so often a reference) was not always right and even apologized for being wrong on something that was subsequently proved right....even NOW the leading cosmologists and astrophysicists and "experts" in M-Theory don't agree on fundamental issues. So, great minds are wrong, just like great books....

I've read that there are 11 dimension, but that their might be 12, but then there might be as many as we need......and as for what was their before the big bang?.....the same things that's North of the North Pole, obviously.


Interesting that you developed above theme, because I'm still on the tack 'Nothing' doesn't become 'Something'. Bear with me, see if my lousy description puts some of you on to the right track, then having got the correct name, go to pbs.org and Nova and do a search on the topic by name.

Unfortunately I came into the TV programme during about the last 25%, roughly a month or two back. Taking something like a small branch on a tree, or another example might be a strand of patterned seaweed, using magnification, you can get closer into the object and what is revealed are a set of repetitive steps, the same structure appearing more minutely, over and over again. Chances are what I was looking at were coloured computerised graphic patterns, and it was the colouring which initially attracted me. Obviously the more powerful the microscope the more depth one could get into - probably to the point of infinity - I wasn't considering this topic at the time - but perhaps there just isn't infinity to this process. If we think 'humans' we would tend to suggest there is an infinity - but is that 'assuaged' by the fact that this process of infinity is generated from the mother's womb or the male sperm or both, going back to endless previous generations.

It seems to me, that our so called pure scientific thought is derived from our own human historical experience. We tend to see time as being finite, the sun rises, the sun sets, the earth cycles with other planets and we have seasons etc. For a human 'convenience' we have built the concept of time to indicate a Beginning and an End. Not only that, but how do we place the Ice Age, Bronze Age, Iron Age without some time check-book. Time was further compartmentalised into calendars, hence the fact that the old Jewish calendar gives us Hannakuh on the same day as Christmas this year.

With due regard to pure scientists like Einstein and Hawking, I see the word 'theory' being used to explain current concepts. Are they still purely theory or are they provable, but only by a 'leap of faith', in a scientific context. An honoured man has got his logic and mathematics right, so he must be right. On the basis that he is right, now we advance further with another extension of scientific thought.

Back to the tree twig or seaweed, unless proven otherwise, it looks to me like hard evidence for an infinity and that there never was and never will be a Beginning and an End. Things, shapes might look very different in a zillion years from now, but still no nearer to a finite conclusion.

I searched PBS thinking Evolution might give me a lead to what I had been watching. No luck - but I did find the following under that ubiquitous title - FAQ :-

11. Does evolution prove there is no God?

No. Many people, from evolutionary biologists to important religious figures like Pope John Paul II, contend that the time-tested theory of evolution does not refute the presence of God. They acknowledge that evolution is the description of a process that governs the development of life on Earth. Like other scientific theories, including Copernican theory, atomic theory, and the germ theory of disease, evolution deals only with objects, events, and processes in the material world. Science has nothing to say one way or the other about the existence of God or about people's spiritual beliefs.


Jimmy
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: religion
    ... > at the time - but perhaps there just isn't infinity to this process. ... scientists are only just coming to deal with them. ... > I searched PBS thinking Evolution might give me a lead to what I had been ... Does evolution prove there is no God? ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Fundies worry about their own kids. Oh, the horror!
    ... humanistic setting and it is only God who will communicate that to His ... Tell me what is this science you keep refering to because it sounds ... We have observed evolution through mutation and natural selection ... scientists and propagandists with only a political or power agenda. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: OT: Atheism. (Was Re: Alter a string in multiple files?)
    ... God is an energy, in the terms of spirit or consciousness etc., ... Examples would include the evolution of modern dogs ... I'm not sure how you differentiate this from meaning 3. ... Most scientists in this field would reject the term "evolution" for ...
    (comp.sys.acorn.apps)
  • Re: The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins (long)
    ... you can't believe God until you feel him ... Of course - as long as they don't include the belief that your beliefs ... All the world's scientists have been ... of survival instinct behind evolution? ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Well Well Well.... Lookie at what we have here.
    ... Francis Collins, the director of the US National Human ... man "closer to God". ... evolution" argument attempting to con believers into accepting ... serving scientists square with that? ...
    (talk.origins)