Thanks Fractal Trader.
· List topics · post a topic · subscribe · Google ·
and the Search for Unity in Physical Law
by Peter Woit | September 4, 2007
Posted on 10/27/2022 1:59:46 PM PDT by nickcarraway
I am thinking that the closer we get to understanding the properties of matter, the closer we get to understanding God.
I was curious and tried one of those things. The name is correct. It is impossible that I will order another one of those things again.
Whoops! A big chunk of grant money just went up in smoke!
“I find the universe to be rather clumpy.”
That would change the variables wouldn’t it? From the article everything they are doing is to “try and explain why it is smooth and flat”. How do they know it is smooth and flat in the first place? If it is clumpy it would negate everything they doing right? Already been barking up the wrong tree the whole time?
In physics you can never be right, you can only be proven wrong.
First there was nothing and then it exploded.
“Many evolutionists (the honest ones) admit they hold to that theory because the only alternative is a Creator and they refuse to accept it.”
Telos (design, purpose) can exist without a Creator.
I know you don’t get that—and scientists don’t get it either....
Everybody needs to drop all their cultural assumptions and start all over again....
Thanks Fractal Trader.
and the Search for Unity in Physical Law
by Peter Woit | September 4, 2007
Great book!
Only if you first turn yourself about -- which sort of seems like what they're getting ready to do, doesn't it?
Let's call it the quantum hokey string pokey-T.O.E.!
Maybe that's what it's all about?
How do you get "design, purpose" without a designER? Is having a personal God/Creator your sticking point? How do you start all over again with no assumptions when you begin with recognizing design and purpose to the universe?
Von Neumann machines, nanotechnology, time loops, parallel universes and then throw in consciousness as an aspect of some sorts of matter.
You can mix and match those—and that is just based on today’s limited imagination—a civilization a thousand years ahead of us could probably come up with many more possibilities.
We are primitive apes—with a nasty touch of arrogance to go with our ignorance.
“First Cause” has a bunch of hidden assumptions—any or all of which may prove to be incorrect.
It totally begs the question—a question we cannot even begin to understand, much less answer.
For starters we do not even know how time works—whether it is truly sequential or whether that is just a manifestation of the way our minds work.
Why not just admit you reject a God/Creator/Designer and invent your own theory of everything or you could do like many atheists and surmise aliens did it? Of course, where THEY came from has to be ignored. ;o)
The answers ARE there if you earnestly seek to know. God says He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. It takes faith to please Him but you would have to exercise that muscle regardless of your conclusion. I hope you find the answers.
Correct.
Actually Sheldon had a crisis about string theory a season or two before I stopped watching. He then abandoned string theory and presumably remained string free for the rest of the shows run.
Actually Sheldon had a crisis about string theory a season or two before I stopped watching. He then abandoned string theory and presumably remained string free for the rest of the run.
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.
