Skip to comments.String theory “philosophy” challenged
Posted on 06/14/2009 9:41:48 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
String theory philosophy challenged
The big bang is fundamental to cosmic evolution or the idea that somehow the universe made itself. The article majored on the varying ideas that emanate from big bang philosophy, such as dark energy and dark matter etc. that are used to solve some of the science problems of the big bang. It then went on to say that string theory is just another one of these ideas with no basis in experimental science...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
“String theory philosophy challenged”
That’s a relief. Now, I can stop trying to understand it.
I am not a proponent of string theory but my cat is. We can play around with this topic for hours if I let him.
Thanks for the ping!
Funny; I thought it correctly defined Biblical creation. shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ׃
Duh, of course not. It’s gluon based plasma, it’s not slippery, it’s sticky. People sticks and falls on them like on flypaper. Adequate knowledge of this teory could indeed save lifes.
Sisters’ stuck to gluons are often bitten by Moose...
The basic premise of the article seems to be that the Theory of Evolution and String Theory and Big Bang cosmology are based on the assumption that God does not exist, or that God had no hand in Creation.
Why would that be the case?
Personally, I am not a man of religious faith.
However, I have no problem accepting the idea that God might exist, and I have no problem accepting the idea that Evolution or String Theory might be the product of Intelligent Design.
Time will tell.
Very, very few biologists or physicists try to use Evolution or String Theory to “prove” that God does not exist.
Although it may be true that many scientists are not religious, my impression is that the most scientists are motivated by a simple passion...they want to understand the the incredibly complex and confusing facts of the natural world.
I’m all shocked the evo-cultist/science-purists weren’t challenging string theory. Just shocked!
String theory is quite objective. What atheists use to challenge the existence of God are oxidation-reduction reactions and the gas “laws”.
You’re shocked that biologists, paleontologists, geneticists, etc aren’t challenging string theory? Why would they? Those fields of science could hardly be more different. That’d be like like nuclear physicists tackling meteorology.
String theory philosophy challengedDuh .. yeah, by Physicists, and has been for a few years now. Because, it didn't *work* as there were FIVE of THEM. And that's Four too many in physics. /s
The new thing is the Membrane Theory. Or 'M Theory', or just 'brane'. That *works* as they took the String Theory and 'added' another dimension. String theory has Ten Dimensions of spacetime, the Membrane Theory has Eleven Dimensions of spacetime.
It answers the Big Bang and *proves* time existed before the Big Bang and solves that singularity 'thingy' (technical term). It also *proves* that there are Alternate Universes - unlimited Alternate Universes.
And this does not mean there is No God. As 'someone' had to make the Membranes and Alternate Universes in the first place.
As to the Red Shift of Stars & Earth Centric stuff of Hubble. That's another matter (pun intended)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.