That explains why my commute seems to take forever some days.
Posted on 11/12/2010 1:18:50 PM PST by Diana in Wisconsin
It’s worse than that, number 1 rules in “all possibilities” which necessarily includes God and number 8 rules God out. Both can not be true.
He should have been a democrat Congressman.
Virtual particles require the prerequisite of energy, time and space. But only green energy.
That's a comment better-directed at the folks whose logic leads to such interesting questions ... whether they claim it came from randomness, or nothing.
That explains why my commute seems to take forever some days.
AND 16 as well, for your declining, um, Sunset years....
It is my belief that the information comes fromt he mind of God, not from nothing. Of course I cannot even begin to expalin how ‘the mind of God’ IS since it is God Who made time and space and any other dimensions, and put the energy/command into it to generate all that there is. I havce figured out that particles are condensates, but what a feeble thing to finally get given the enormity of the whole sheebang God has created! Oh yeah, and I’ve figure out that dimension time is a volume not a linear thing.
You taking the Mobius Strip to work???
Even if true, I have always failed to see how Hawking thought this was a "scientific" statement. If you take out the unscientific term, "based on," and replace it with the more defined "caused by," it's not clear how the (assumed for purposes of argument) fact that religion is "caused by" authority (whatever that is, eh, Steven?) makes it less valid than science which (here) is "caused by" observation and reason" in the observer.
Hawking himself says the past cannot be known definitely and that we might all have a skewed vantage for observation because, for all we know, we live in a "fishbowl." If those are true, they militate AGAINST the validity of observation, and reason based on observation, and therefore against the superiority of science or mere religion.
Also, as noted above, Hawking glosses over the idea of what, exactly, is "authority" -- the "authority" that religion is based on or is caused by. Authority must be some kind of power, even if only analogous to the power of gravity. So how would this differ at all from the basis for science in Hawking's conclusion? Aren't religion and science equally, fundamentally, based on POWER of some sort?
No matter how hard people try, they cannot get around the reality that God is just as valid an explanation for the creation of the universe and humans as science without God.
They don't have to accept that God is the explanation for the what is observed, but it surely is not scientific to rule that "hypothesis" out.
ping for later review.
NYT: Maybe we are alone in the universe, after all.
How many goldfish are registered to vote in Monza, Italy?
Uh, okay.
8. The universe is its own creator One of the most talked-about assertions in the whole book is that we don't need the idea of God to explain what sparked the creation of the universe.
Wait, I thought that you said that "the past is possibility" and that "events in the past that were not directly observed did not happen in a definite way. Instead they happened in all possible ways."
Sounds like the expert in fluid mechanics was badly hung over, and was staring daggers at the noisy cat-lappin' going on a few feet away.Cats use cunning physics to lap milkPerfectly judged tongue speed allows cats to draw the maximum amount of milk into their mouths when they lap, say scientists. Cats are smarter than people think -- at least when it comes to hydrodynamics. High-speed video footage of household pets feeding has revealed the exquisite balance of forces at work when a cat laps a bowl of milk... the cat's tongue makes only the briefest contact with the liquid's surface, before quickly retracting to pull a thin column of milk into the mouth. The act of lapping is judged so perfectly the cat catches the milk in its mouth before gravity overcomes the liquid's inertia inducing it to fall back into the bowl. The unusual study began when Roman Stocker, an expert in fluid mechanics at MIT in Cambridge, Massachusetts, became fascinated by watching his eight-year-old cat, Cutta Cutta, drinking at breakfast time.
by Ian Sample
Thursday 11 November 2010
Whoops! Thanks Las Vegas Dave!
It's just a whole bunch of ridiculous THEORIES to get more government grants or to sell books. They don’t understand the universe at all.
This is just like all the global warming fake science liberals created.
The media wants us to think that because these idiot goons call themselves scientists that we have to believe what they say. Well I say global warming was a hoax and so are these stupid theories.
B4L8r
I’ve always loved cats. When I was a kid (maybe eight years old)I got down on the floor to watch my cat lap up milk. I knew hhow she did it 57 years ago! And the government hasn’t paid me a penny to reveal it! One other trick my kitty could od: you could toss morsels of meat in her general direction and she would snatch them out of the air with one claw-extended paw. she had me traine3d pretty well: when she wanted out int he summertime, she would climb the screen. When she wanted out int he winter she would jump up onto the matle beside the door and stretch out to look out where she wanted to go. When she wanted in, she climbed ont he sctreen again or climbed up into the space between the ‘storm window’ plastic and the glass od the window ... we were too poor to afford plexi or glass storm windows.
Yah mon.
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.