Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Enosh
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is a 'fable' then, is it?

The difference between the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and a fable is that it has been experimentally verified and the experiments are repeatable. Fables and Miracles have the unfortunate quality of having the exact same quality and veracity as rumors.

Our proof is the Bible. You should see a group of us Wacko Fundamentalist bickering the finer points of Scripture. We can be just as exacting as you guys.
I've seen heated debates over a comma. Should it be there, one word over or altogether absent?

Yes, trying to make sense out of a rumor is hard isn't it?

That's a bit like you guys arguing over which String Theory is correct, or if you should just draw a big circle around them all and call it a day.

Funny you should mention String Theory. It has no experimental evidence supporting it and the 'theory' in the name is a misnomer and all the researchers know this. No one says that String theory has been demonstrated, it is simply a mathematical tool that they are trying to use to investigate a hypothesis.

This is the primary difference between Science and Religion. Experimental evidence can prove a hypothesis wrong and when that happens the hypothesis is discarded. Theories also have great predictive power that has been verified countless times.

Religion can't be proven wrong, because it is open to any interpretation. I showed that rationally the Ark couldn't have happened and the best response I got was that the Ark was a 'Miracle' and anything is possible with a 'Miracle'. The same goes with Religions predictive power. Christ said that this generation shall not pass away before I shall return again. Religion just keeps changing the definition of 'generation'. Religions specific predictive ability is non existent, that is why you see so few 'Prophets' today.

2,287 posted on 07/08/2007 6:41:33 AM PDT by LeGrande (Muslims, Jews and Christians all believe in the same God of Abraham.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2280 | View Replies ]


To: LeGrande
"experimentally verified and the experiments are repeatable."

And there have been many archaeological finds which uphold the Bible.

"... sense out of a rumor is hard isn't it?"

The Bible is a 'rumor', okay. Your loss.

"Religion can't be proven wrong"

Several books were stripped from the Bible because they contradicted it. In other words, they were proven wrong.

(The BoM also fits this bill nicely.)

"keeps changing the definition of 'generation'."

Link

Multiple possible translations from Greek to English.

2,290 posted on 07/08/2007 9:28:19 AM PDT by Enosh (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2287 | View Replies ]

To: LeGrande
This is the primary difference between Science and Religion.

Both enterprises should be engaged in the search for truth. I believe that God wants us to do all we can to find Him. Prayerful study of the scriptures is not the only way we can do that. Studying the world that we live in is another avenue to gain understanding of God and His works. Truth is truth, regardless of where we find it.

The problem often lies in deciding that something that seems true, must be true. The earth centered universe comes to mind. It took century's after Galileo's work for the church to back away from it's incorrect view. I believe that we are in a similar situation today with one big difference. It is the scientists who are doggedly hanging onto a failing theory. That failing theory was proposed by Georges Lemaître, a Catholic Priest. He called it his 'hypothesis of the primeval atom' but it is commonly known today as the Big Bang. His work was based on Einsteins theories that made gravity king. The problem is that there is more and more observational evidence that this notion is flawed. Anyone in the scientific community that questions these ideas are marginalized and thrown into the category of dissident scientists. Albert Einstein is the main stream cosmologists 'God' and questioning his work is unthinkable. Einstein himself was uncomfortable with his work and spent the latter years of his life trying to come up with a more universal theory to replace General and Special Relativity.

Experimental evidence can prove a hypothesis wrong and when that happens the hypothesis is discarded. Theories also have great predictive power that has been verified countless times.

This is exactly how I felt up until about a year ago. I was reading an article on the Internet trumpeting that proof of dark matter had been found. One of the commenter's to this article said that the Plasma Cosmologists would have a different view of this discovery. I was intrigued and I started to look into this area of science that I knew little about. It has been a real eye opener.

I now know that there is a lot of observational evidence that clearly calls into question the Big Bang. If you're not aware of Halton Arp's work, that would be a good place to start. He is an astronomer, not a plasma guy. He has been called the modern day Galileo. Some of the people who recognize him as such are Nobel Prize winners. His work has dealt with observations that call into question the idea that red shift is the result of recessional velocity. His discoveries have not been effectively refuted, they have been buried because they bring into question the popular model of our universe. He was told to change his line of research or he would lose his observation time at Mt. Palomar. He refused and had to move to Germany to continue his work.

By the way, these dissident scientists are not creationists or intelligent design guys. They are not pushing a theological agenda. They are simply saying that the observations that we are getting from our increasingly sophisticated satellites and telescopes are calling into question many of the theories that are passed off as "beyond questioning". It's interesting reading.

I should add a disclaimer. Not all dissident scientists follow productive paths. Some are rather nutty. The ones that back up their ideas using good observational data are who we need to give ear to. To many of them are brushed aside because they threaten the limited research dollars that are available. The sad thing is that the tax payers have spent billions of dollars on projects of little merit. The money spent to develop nuclear fusion power reactors is a great example of waste. They have literally nothing to show for the years of research. The scientists on the outside have a good idea as to why the fusion scientists are unsuccessful and the data being gathered by our solar satellites back their claims. If more people really knew what was going on there would be some heads rolling. It's all about turf.

2,291 posted on 07/08/2007 11:14:28 AM PDT by sandude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2287 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson