Posted on 12/10/2014 3:59:19 PM PST by LibWhacker
I mean, I don't agree with their thinking entirely, myself, particularly the article of faith they cling to about the Universe being a "closed system." That's "settled science" to most physicists, and its their excuse for ignoring even the possibility of a God, the God of Abraham in particular, from their thought experiments. And "settled science" is not science.
Nevertheless, more "posits" are broken on the reefs of reality than borne true, but only in their pursuit of experimentation, even when their only tools are mathematics. Most of science is eliminating the unreal.
Not a bad writer, but he misses the point about time and perception, and perhaps the scientists he describes don't see the point, either.
If what they imply is true, the "past" is all possible universes zipped up into now, and the future, the "not-happened yet" - the actual "multiverse," are all the possibilities. They might really be onto something, a better description of reality, which is all our science can ever hope to do.
New theories suggest the big bang was not the beginning, and that we may live in the past of a parallel universe... In the evolution of cosmic structure, is entropy or gravity the more dominant force?Thanks LibWhacker.
PLACEMARKER
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.