I'm shocked....

[Syn7]

That nobody has even mentioned the fact that one of the greatest discoveries in our lifetimes was announced a few days ago. Well, I guess it is a wee bit pre mature to call it the higgs boson for sure but even if it isn't a higgs boson it is something we have never seen before. Two bodies independently confirm glimpsing what most believe to be the long lost boson shown in mathematical models years ago. Amazing stuff. Those who aren't schooled or interested should get caught up, at least a laymans version. These people are the ones who dictate the direction of mankind, ultimately their discoveries go the furthest. Physicists are the real priests and the closest to GOD. While some pretend and dream, these people actually commune with the cosmos on a significantly higher level than the average cat. You wanna hear god? listen to background radiation, you wanna see god, go to CERN.

[David Jamieson]

You will be surprised by what is discovered in the next 2 years. Never mind the boson. Higgs figured on that 40 years ago and the LHC confirmed the theory.

what will be discovered next on top of this is important because this boson allows us to understand:

1. Space is not "nothing. It is something.
2. Space can be manipulated, bent and moved.
3. Photonic properties in space will become something useful.

Huge discoveries and realizations are now coming down the pipe like a deluge.
Much of the information that people over 50yrs old have regarding science and the workings of the physical universe is outmoded and often wrong. :(

Back to school senior citizens! lol
It's frustrating, I know!

[sanjuro_ronin]

That nobody has even mentioned the fact that one of the greatest discoveries in our lifetimes was announced a few days ago. Well, I guess it is a wee bit pre mature to call it the higgs boson for sure but even if it isn't a higgs boson it is something we have never seen before. Two bodies independently confirm glimpsing what most believe to be the long lost boson shown in mathematical models years ago. Amazing stuff. Those who aren't schooled or interested should get caught up, at least a laymans version. These people are the ones who dictate the direction of mankind, ultimately their discoveries go the furthest. Physicists are the real priests and the closest to GOD. While some pretend and dream, these people actually commune with the cosmos on a significantly higher level than the average cat. You wanna hear god? listen to background radiation, you wanna see god, go to CERN.

Dude, you do know why it was called the "god particle" right?

[Hebrew Hammer]

Dude, you do know why it was called the "god particle" right?

Because Chi was already taken?

[sanjuro_ronin]

Because Chi was already taken?

LMAO !!
Well played sir !

[David Jamieson]

Dude, you do know why it was called the "god particle" right?

Yeah, because you can't have mass without it.

:p

[sanjuro_ronin]

Yeah, because you can't have mass without it.

:p

LOL !
According to Leon Lederman,who coined the phrase, it was called “the God particle” for two reasons: (1) like God, the particle underlies every physical object that exists; and (2) like God, the particle is very difficult to detect!

I think the other option was the "godd**** particle", :D

[Lucas]

Brian Greene explains (http://www.aspenideas.org/session/god-particle?gclid=CJDvxYqfobECFekZQgod5ErFkg) for anyone wanted to know what this is all about.

[sanjuro_ronin]

We need to remember that all this does is get us one step closer to confirming the STANDARD physics model.

[David Jamieson]

We need to remember that all this does is get us one step closer to confirming the STANDARD physics model.

hahahaha.

Yeah, I don't think we are overrun with physicists here.
I would venture, that without google, most couldn't even name the 4 fundamental forces of physics.

I said NO google (or any internet search) :p

[mawali]

Now I truly believe man created God!:confused:

[Lee Chiang Po]

You should know that this is all BS. These physicists are like 12 year olds with a wild imagination. Albert Einstein was probably the worst one of all.
If you were to talk about anything else other than physics the way they do, you would end up in a loony bin. They get away with this rediculous tripe because people mistakenly think they are smarter than they are when in reality they are stark raving mad.

[Lee Chiang Po]

Now I truly believe man created God!:confused:

Well, actually, he did create god. God did not exist until man decided that he should have life after death. A god would be the best way to get to an afterlife. I think that Jesus was a real person that was foolish enough to think he was the son of a god. If he was DNA'ed I suspect that it would be determined that Joseph was actually his real dad. I suppose that all of you know that penetration is not really necessary in order to empregnate a female. In modern society, Joseph would have been arrested and charged with having sex with a child and have to register as a sex offender forever after.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Now I truly believe man created God!:confused:

If you mean that Man has "humanized" God, yes of course, how could we not do that?

[sanjuro_ronin]

hahahaha.

Yeah, I don't think we are overrun with physicists here.
I would venture, that without google, most couldn't even name the 4 fundamental forces of physics.

I said NO google (or any internet search) :p

One of the things I have always loved about physics is the beauty of it's "simplicity".
Probably because physicists don't try to make the data FIT their conclusions (preconceived basically), but allow the data to lead them to the conclusion,
Now not all are like that of course, remember the issues so many had with the "big band" and all that conclusion that it could lead to.
Why? because some physicists are more than that.
A good physicist accepts what is there and leaves the "philosophy" to others.

[Syn7]

Dude, you do know why it was called the "god particle" right?

Of course, but what I said was only a partial reference to that term.

[Syn7]

You will be surprised by what is discovered in the next 2 years. Never mind the boson. Higgs figured on that 40 years ago and the LHC confirmed the theory.

what will be discovered next on top of this is important because this boson allows us to understand:

1. Space is not "nothing. It is something.
2. Space can be manipulated, bent and moved.
3. Photonic properties in space will become something useful.

Huge discoveries and realizations are now coming down the pipe like a deluge.
Much of the information that people over 50yrs old have regarding science and the workings of the physical universe is outmoded and often wrong. :(

Back to school senior citizens! lol
It's frustrating, I know!

Well, let's not get too far ahead of ourselves. I am optimistically hopefull. But as of today nothing has been proven. We'll see. All I know is that if it isn't a higgs boson it's an even greater find. We all know it's there. But knowing and proving are two different things. Just ask Sanjuro ;)


Compound info is crazy. We will advance at an exponential rate, we have been all along. But now we're getting into the real big numbers thanx to artificial help.

To date there are a ton of things we can do that most don't know about. We have teleported particles(yeah I know, is it really the same particle. That's another discussion) we have seen and know how to bend space and we already know how to use photons for communication over long distances. We are lucky tho, we get to be alive during this transition from theory to practice. We can 3D print human organs and the like. Ever seen a perfectly clean adult kidney that has never actually been in anyone and was not grown? I have. Can't wait to see what else comes.

And we are at a point now where it doesn't really matter how much you can retain or when you were born, nobody can ever really know all about any particular field. Certainly not amateurs like us. The more curious of us that are able to retain more may feel like we have a leg up, and I guess it's true to an extent, but access to info is changing the value of that. It's a double edged sword tho, I know people who actually say "why would I bother memorizing something I can access on my phone whenever I need it?" They have a point, but I still have to roll my eyes and just let it slide, lol...

[Syn7]

Brian Greene explains (http://www.aspenideas.org/session/god-particle?gclid=CJDvxYqfobECFekZQgod5ErFkg) for anyone wanted to know what this is all about.

Brain Greene is fresh. I liked hime ever since I read "The elegant Universe". Awesome book.

[Syn7]

We need to remember that all this does is get us one step closer to confirming the STANDARD physics model.

Yeah then how do you expain that we have seen macro objects behave more in line with what is described as Quantum Mechanics. You can do nfity sh1t in a vaccuum. Contamination is a huge problem in physics, but not in this case, so far anyways.

I doubt very much that any unification theory will look anything like either model. The micro and the macro are connected, we know it, we believe it, we just need to prove it. Time will tell.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking newtonian physics, I'm just sayin'......

[Syn7]

hahahaha.

Yeah, I don't think we are overrun with physicists here.
I would venture, that without google, most couldn't even name the 4 fundamental forces of physics.

I said NO google (or any internet search) :p

Oh come on. Even those who couldn't answer would be like " oh yeah, DUUUH" when you told them the answer. Most know G and EM, I guess the other two would be less known, but still. It is basic high school science.

Now, had you said " I doubt many here could explain the diff between weak and strong interaction" I would give you the nod. Just naming the forces isn't tough tho. Anybody on this site capable of having a meaningful convo about bosons should have no trouble with the very basics. Although I have met a few cats who just right into M-theory but don't know any basics what so ever, but they expose themselves rather quickly on any sort of followup.

[Syn7]

You should know that this is all BS. These physicists are like 12 year olds with a wild imagination. Albert Einstein was probably the worst one of all.
If you were to talk about anything else other than physics the way they do, you would end up in a loony bin. They get away with this rediculous tripe because people mistakenly think they are smarter than they are when in reality they are stark raving mad.

You really believe that?

So when evidence is shown, what's that? A lucky guess from a madman?

If it seems like lunacy to you maybe it's because you are just that far behind that you aren't capable of comprehending? Either that or you are just being closed to it and repeating somebody elses words. Either way WTF??? Everyday you enjoy a quality of life that is DIRECTLY related to their work? You drive a car? use kitchen appliances? Do you believe the concepts that allowed these things to be were the rantings of mad men? Just how far back do you need to be taken to actually understand what it is they're talking about? You understand that ideas like the 4 forces of interaction all had to start with one cat saying "a force is a push or a pull". Just because you don't see the connections does not mean that others are imagining them.


I can see how this field could make a man go mad tho. Especially the smarter ones.

[bawang]

i believe in guan gong. he is real.

[Raipizo]

Clearly physics are a lie

[SimonM]

hahahaha.

Yeah, I don't think we are overrun with physicists here.
I would venture, that without google, most couldn't even name the 4 fundamental forces of physics.

I said NO google (or any internet search) :p

I haven't read the comments yet so I don't know if anybody's done this but...

Electromagnetic force
Strong nuclear force
Weak nuclear force
Gravity


IIRC...

[Vajramusti]

That nobody has even mentioned the fact that one of the greatest discoveries in our lifetimes was announced a few days ago. Well, I guess it is a wee bit pre mature to call it the higgs boson for sure but even if it isn't a higgs boson it is something we have never seen before. Two bodies independently confirm glimpsing what most believe to be the long lost boson shown in mathematical models years ago. Amazing stuff. Those who aren't schooled or interested should get caught up, at least a laymans version. These people are the ones who dictate the direction of mankind, ultimately their discoveries go the furthest. Physicists are the real priests and the closest to GOD. While some pretend and dream, these people actually commune with the cosmos on a significantly higher level than the average cat. You wanna hear god? listen to background radiation, you wanna see god, go to CERN.
-----------------------------------------------------------
It was touched on in one of the forums(in passing)---shockingly- the wing chun forum.!!

[Syn7]

yeah, too bad most of these cats aren't interested in talking about it much. Such a great story.

Just to touch on what I was saying to SJ before about higgs boson proving the standard model. Yes it is predicted in the standard model and indeed this is a great vindication in some ways. IN SOME WAYS. The bottom line is this tho, only 4% of fundamental particles and their interacting forces are covered by the standard model. The other 96% is NOT!!! So really, if I was a betting man....
Truth be told, I believe they are both right and both wrong and like I said before, any unification theory will be different than both. Can't wait to see what's next.


Oh and for the record, this isn't a fact by any means. A five sigma result = 1 in a million chance of being coinkyd1nk! So far it APPEARS to be the heaviest boson we've ever seen decay. But there is a chance that this is something else altogether. I am hopefully optimistic and regretting not being a physics major. :):(

[SoCo KungFu]

You should know that this is all BS. These physicists are like 12 year olds with a wild imagination. Albert Einstein was probably the worst one of all.
If you were to talk about anything else other than physics the way they do, you would end up in a loony bin. They get away with this rediculous tripe because people mistakenly think they are smarter than they are when in reality they are stark raving mad.

This coming from the guy that believes humans evolved in the water because we don't have fur....

[sanjuro_ronin]

Yeah then how do you expain that we have seen macro objects behave more in line with what is described as Quantum Mechanics. You can do nfity sh1t in a vaccuum. Contamination is a huge problem in physics, but not in this case, so far anyways.

I doubt very much that any unification theory will look anything like either model. The micro and the macro are connected, we know it, we believe it, we just need to prove it. Time will tell.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking newtonian physics, I'm just sayin'......

Say all you want, all this does is get one step closer to confirming the standard mode.
What is beyond that is just that, beyond it and I am sure that this will have SOME impact on quantum physics, but we don't know to what degree yet.

[sanjuro_ronin]

yeah, too bad most of these cats aren't interested in talking about it much. Such a great story.

Just to touch on what I was saying to SJ before about higgs boson proving the standard model. Yes it is predicted in the standard model and indeed this is a great vindication in some ways. IN SOME WAYS. The bottom line is this tho, only 4% of fundamental particles and their interacting forces are covered by the standard model. The other 96% is NOT!!! So really, if I was a betting man....
Truth be told, I believe they are both right and both wrong and like I said before, any unification theory will be different than both. Can't wait to see what's next.


Oh and for the record, this isn't a fact by any means. A five sigma result = 1 in a million chance of being coinkyd1nk! So far it APPEARS to be the heaviest boson we've ever seen decay. But there is a chance that this is something else altogether. I am hopefully optimistic and regretting not being a physics major. :):(

Fair enough but we have to accept that, as much as we KNOW about physics, there is still A LOT more to find out.
Establishing a standard mode is the first step in many steps yet to come.
Lets also not forget that when man manipulates nature in his study of the universe, it proves that nature CAN be manipulated.

[PalmStriker]

That nobody has even mentioned the fact that one of the greatest discoveries in our lifetimes was announced a few days ago. Well, I guess it is a wee bit pre mature to call it the higgs boson for sure but even if it isn't a higgs boson it is something we have never seen before. Two bodies independently confirm glimpsing what most believe to be the long lost boson shown in mathematical models years ago. Amazing stuff. Those who aren't schooled or interested should get caught up, at least a laymans version. These people are the ones who dictate the direction of mankind, ultimately their discoveries go the furthest. Physicists are the real priests and the closest to GOD. While some pretend and dream, these people actually commune with the cosmos on a significantly higher level than the average cat. You wanna hear god? listen to background radiation, you wanna see god, go to CERN.
Smoke and Mirrors. Only 6 months ago or so the CERN team was denounced for not doing their homework by claiming they were able to achieve "their" goals in the discovery tank by means of faster than light technology. Well, other/independent scientists made the discovery that their claims were bogus and they had to own up to it. Then PRESTO! MediaSpin: They discover the "God Particle " afterall. Not everybody, including many scientists are buying it. Who is really footing the bill for this quadrillion dollar White Elephant Torus Ring? http://quantumtantra.blogspot.com/2012/07/higgs-particle-discovered-at-cern.html

[SimonM]

That isn't what happened... at all really with the tachyon experiments. Will explain tomorrow. Going to bed.

[PalmStriker]

The real faster than light research is being done by the "assembled Team" at the University of Bristol, UK. Get some sleep. I followed the press releases, etc. What do you think they're really trying to reverse engineer? :D

[SimonM]

They aren't trying to engineer anything.

A team at CERN thought they observed neutrinos (being sleepy I accidentally said tachyons last night) traveling faster than light. They reported the finding but said they expected they were mistaken. Science journalists and tinfoil hat saucer fans ignored that caviat. A second independent team at CERN attempted to duplicate the experiment and confirmed the finding of the first experiment had been mistaken. Science isn't always exciting, but it represents our best method for learning things.

[David Jamieson]

They aren't trying to engineer anything.

A team at CERN thought they observed neutrinos (being sleepy I accidentally said tachyons last night) traveling faster than light. They reported the finding but said they expected they were mistaken. Science journalists and tinfoil hat saucer fans ignored that caviat. A second independent team at CERN attempted to duplicate the experiment and confirmed the finding of the first experiment had been mistaken. Science isn't always exciting, but it represents our best method for learning things.

This is true. The math was indeed wrong. And Light remains the constant

[mickey]

Greetings,

When I saw the word tachyon I nearly flipped. I am glad you corrected yourself, SimonM.

There was initial concern with the CERN's endeavor, concerns that it could be catastrophic. If we took a look if some of the religious descriptions of God, one is that God is without bounds; that alone will let you know that they did not discover the god particle. If they really did, the result could be so catastrophic, that it would make the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki look like the striking of a small match. And, if not an explosive/combustive force, it could be a massive implosive force: a black hole.

These guys may have realized this AFTER building the CERN and now they are stuck with it.


mickey

[SimonM]

This is true. The math was indeed wrong. And Light remains the constant

Ayup. :D .....

[David Jamieson]

Or more correctly, photons.

[Fa Xing]

This coming from the guy that believes humans evolved in the water because we don't have fur....

Actually there is a hypothesis that our ancestors spent time in a swamp land that may have contributed to the lack of body hair we seem to notice on most humans.

[bawang]

Actually there is a hypothesis that our ancestors spent time in a swamp land that may have contributed to the lack of body hair we seem to notice on most humans.

otters nd platypus ahave plenty of hair.

[Fa Xing]

otters nd platypus ahave plenty of hair.

Depends on the area, and species. Whales and dolphins do not have hair and they are aquatic species of mammals.

[Lee Chiang Po]

The nose with openings pointing downward, the tear gland that used to be a third eye lid, the little muscled lobe that is almost directly over the ear opening, the elastic bands around the nostrel openings, and the ability to close off the nose from the roof of the mouth by muscles is not simply by chance. Also, the closest match to our feet are the rear flippers of certain seals. The flat hand with the opposing thumb, and the slight webbing of the hands. Coincidence? The ability to swim great distances, and the ability to swim so many different ways, even under water. Coincidence? Human babies are born knowing how to swim and have no fear of it until they reach a certain age. Compared to the animals around us, we are almost completely helpless without our weapons. We are designed to swim.
As for the particles. What difference do they make and just how does knowing that they exist matter? We can not use this information in our daily lives. Seeing that the atom is actually the largest thing in our entire universe that we know of, the particles that make them up are infinite. Each new particle will be constructed of it's own particles and so on down the line with no end to it. We only know the upper end of it. So the importance of these particles is totally and completely without significance.

[SimonM]

Depends on the area, and species. Whales and dolphins do not have hair and they are aquatic species of mammals.

Bawang's point is that there is very little about human evolution that REQUIRES the "aquatic ape hypothesis." It's also an hypothesis which has been effectively discredited in academia; some people cling to it because... reasons...

With regard to the whole "things smaller than atoms don't matter," I just have to say that modern computing could not exist at all without the developments in Quantum Physics that marked the second half of the 20th century. So anybody who feels that nothing smaller than an atom is important had best put their money with their mouth is and stop using solid state transistors.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Bawang's point is that there is very little about human evolution that REQUIRES the "aquatic ape hypothesis." It's also an hypothesis which has been effectively discredited in academia; some people cling to it because... reasons...

With regard to the whole "things smaller than atoms don't matter," I just have to say that modern computing could not exist at all without the developments in Quantum Physics that marked the second half of the 20th century. So anybody who feels that nothing smaller than an atom is important had best put their money with their mouth is and stop using solid state transistors.

This is probably one of the most repeated fallacious arguments.
Pure fantasy.
Why?
Because we ALL know where the technology for computers and pace travel and microprocessors and supersonic speed, nuclear power and stealth technology came from:

http://memecrunch.com/meme/I8E/its-aliens/image.png

[Fa Xing]

Bawang's point is that there is very little about human evolution that REQUIRES the "aquatic ape hypothesis." It's also an hypothesis which has been effectively discredited in academia; some people cling to it because... reasons...

I wasn't saying that I agree with it, and I hadn't heard that it was all but disproven but had read that it was a probable hypothesis. I think it stands to reason that the lack of body hair probably has more to do with our sexual attractiveness, and our adaptation to certain climates than anything else. Plus some subgroups still have plenty of hair on their bodies, so it's probably a far more recent change to the human makeup.

I don't know much about the physics stuff, since I study more human biology but I can't wait for FTL travel.

[SimonM]

Plus some subgroups still have plenty of hair on their bodies, so it's probably a far more recent change to the human makeup.


Yo. :cool:

(TMI?)

[sanjuro_ronin]

I wasn't saying that I agree with it, and I hadn't heard that it was all but disproven but had read that it was a probable hypothesis. I think it stands to reason that the lack of body hair probably has more to do with our sexual attractiveness, and our adaptation to certain climates than anything else. Plus some subgroups still have plenty of hair on their bodies, so it's probably a far more recent change to the human makeup.

I don't know much about the physics stuff, since I study more human biology but I can't wait for FTL travel.

Don't confuse cultural perception of "attractiveness" with the evolutionary "reasons' for the variety of appearances from one group to another.
Things become attractive in one culture because that is what they are used to seeing.
Pale in one culture is viewed as a sign of attractiveness and affluence and in another as "sickly" and "poor".

[Fa Xing]

Don't confuse cultural perception of "attractiveness" with the evolutionary "reasons' for the variety of appearances from one group to another.
Things become attractive in one culture because that is what they are used to seeing.
Pale in one culture is viewed as a sign of attractiveness and affluence and in another as "sickly" and "poor".

I am not confusing them at all. It is a valid theory, look into it more, both the Leakys and Dawkins have mentioned it, and Darwin himself may have said so. I don't have the resources at hand to look for it.

Bipedalism may be related to the fact that it exposed our gentalia more, making us more attractive to one another as well. Although I tend to think that bipedalism is more related to tall grasslands, yet some groups were found to still be tree-bound when we started moving into just standing on two feet.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I am not confusing them at all. It is a valid theory, look into it more, both the Leakys and Dawkins have mentioned it, and Darwin himself may have said so. I don't have the resources at hand to look for it.

Bipedalism may be related to the fact that it exposed our gentalia more, making us more attractive to one another as well. Although I tend to think that bipedalism is more related to tall grasslands, yet some groups were found to still be tree-bound when we started moving into just standing on two feet.

You are suggesting that lack of hair was a sexual attraction issue, yet there are many culture that view body hair as a sign of sexual virility, as there are culture that view full figured women as more sexually desirable than thinner women.
And other that obviously do not.
Honestly, suggesting that somehow and based strictly on a cultural perception( because that is all it is), that the driving forces of evolution decided that "less hair = more sexually attractive ??
dude...
Are you suggestion that evolutionary biologist are adding "cultural influence" as a force of evolution alone with natural selection, survival of the fittest, environment and random mutation ?

[Fa Xing]

You are suggesting that lack of hair was a sexual attraction issue, yet there are many culture that view body hair as a sign of sexual virility, as there are culture that view full figured women as more sexually desirable than thinner women.
And other that obviously do not.
Honestly, suggesting that somehow and based strictly on a cultural perception( because that is all it is), that the driving forces of evolution decided that "less hair = more sexually attractive ??
dude...
Are you suggestion that evolutionary biologist are adding "cultural influence" as a force of evolution alone with natural selection, survival of the fittest, environment and random mutation ?

I am not suggesting anything at all, but just regurgitating what I have read from valid sources. We are discussing things that probably happened thousands and probably close to a million years. Human-like "culture" may have been an influence, but less hair means more shown and thus more to be attracted to, this doesn't seem so hard to understand. I am not projecting my own preferences on this at all.

Evolution is a very complex topic and not something that has one type of selection pressure but many, and when the human brain developed, that probably shifted selection pressures. I am not an evolutionary biologist, even though I have an interest in it.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I am not suggesting anything at all, but just regurgitating what I have read from valid sources. We are discussing things that probably happened thousands and probably close to a million years. Human-like "culture" may have been an influence, but less hair means more shown and thus more to be attracted to, this doesn't seem so hard to understand. I am not projecting my own preferences on this at all.

Evolution is a very complex topic and not something that has one type of selection pressure but many, and when the human brain developed, that probably shifted selection pressures. I am not an evolutionary biologist, even though I have an interest in it.

Understood but I think that people may be trying to find "evidence" to fir their preconceived notions in this case.
Less hair means more to show BUT why that would be a sexual attractive thing is base don OUR CURRENT perceptions of what is sexually attractive and even then, NOW, there is no uniform consensus on that.
To think there was one 1000's or 10,000's of year ago doesn't really make much sense to be honest.
Think about it.
Right now we have a pretty big discrepency between what one culture in N.America ( for example) views as sexually attractive compared to a culture in Africa, one in Asia and one in North Europe.
In terms of hair, weight, skin colour and body shape.
No reason to think that ( different views) was any different 5000 years ago or 1 million.

[Lucas]

Everyone knows that where Ginnungagap and Niflheim meet the heat and cold created Ymir, Ymir grew the first frost ogres. The thawing of the frost created the primeval cow Audhumla who nourished Ymir. Who in turn was nourished by licking the salty ice-blocks. Out of one of these ice blocks a man emerged named Buri, who fathered a son named Bor. Bor married the daughter of an ice giant and had three sons. Odin, Vili, and Ve. The three sons commited patricide and slew Ymir. When Ymir fell the sons took him to Ginnungagap and created our world. While walking along the sea shores, the brothers came upon two trees, from who they created Man and Woman. Odin gave them spirit and life, Vili gave them understanding and movement, and Ve gave them clothing and names. The man was named Ash and the woman Elm. From Ash and Elm have all of us sprung.

So, as you can plainly see, there is no such thing as an evolutionary process that got us to our current state. The 'missing link' does not exist, and all the primate states that we see in the evolutionary chain are simply the maggots that appeared in Ymir's fallen flesh, and whom recieved human understanding and appearance by the God brothers' decree. Though they continued to live in the rocks and the earth, and had the appearance of men, they were not true Men.

I hope this clears everything up for everyone. There is of course more invovled, but this is the quick version.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Everyone knows that where Ginnungagap and Niflheim meet the heat and cold created Ymir, Ymir grew the first frost ogres. The thawing of the frost created the primeval cow Audhumla who nourished Ymir. Who in turn was nourished by licking the salty ice-blocks. Out of one of these ice blocks a man emerged named Buri, who fathered a son named Bor. Bor married the daughter of an ice giant and had three sons. Odin, Vili, and Ve. The three sons commited patricide and slew Ymir. When Ymir fell the sons took him to Ginnungagap and created our world. While walking along the sea shores, the brothers came upon two trees, from who they created Man and Woman. Odin gave them spirit and life, Vili gave them understanding and movement, and Ve gave them clothing and names. The man was named Ash and the woman Elm. From Ash and Elm have all of us sprung.

So, as you can plainly see, there is no such thing as an evolutionary process that got us to our current state. The 'missing link' does not exist, and all the primate states that we see in the evolutionary chain are simply the maggots that appeared in Ymir's fallen flesh, and whom recieved human understanding and appearance by the God brothers' decree. Though they continued to live in the rocks and the earth, and had the appearance of men, they were not true Men.

I hope this clears everything up for everyone. There is of course more invovled, but this is the quick version.

Pagan ******* !
:p

[Lucas]

Well someone has to be!!!

[sanjuro_ronin]

Well someone has to be!!!

So you don't feel bad about things:
http://biologos.org/uploads/static-content/Human-Evolution-Infograpic_full.png

[Lucas]

that actually supports the creation process. since ymir's maggots turned humanoid were before the brothers created man and woman. they would naturally be around far before the first appearance of '**** sapiens' thats why we'll never find the missing link.

while ash and elm were given the understanding of man, they were not given the knowledge, this is why you see the developmental process from the start of **** sapien forward. we still had to figure it all out on our own. the all father isnt that generous!!!

[Lucas]

oh and we hunted those *******s to extinction.

[sanjuro_ronin]

oh and we hunted those *******s to extinction.

It's how we roll !!!

****sapines #1 !!!

[mawali]

Suggestion that evolutionary biologist are adding "cultural influence" as a force of evolution alone with natural selection, survival of the fittest, environment and random mutation ?

From what I have seen in the literature, it seems that many of these evolutionary biologists confuse the cultural influence with actual biological process and even using it as propaganda for gain.

Many people see the differences (at least in America) as evolutionay though it is actually cultural. Choice of mates, values probably before the industrial revoilution were biological but with immigration these choices have become cultural in places like USA. A woman from one culture who was taught that hairy men were barbarians (she agreed with that concept in her native homeland!)now comes to USA then suddenly her choice changse due to the sociocultural milieu and knowledge that her present hairy partner has advantage and priviledge to make her lifestyle easier. Cultural or biological? Or perhaps, she knows which side her bread is buttered!

[Lucas]

It's how we roll !!!

****sapines #1 !!!

GO TEAM ****!!!!....wait a second....

[sanjuro_ronin]

From what I have seen in the literature, it seems that many of these evolutionary biologists confuse the cultural influence with actual biological process and even using it as propaganda for gain.

Many people see the differences (at least in America) as evolutionay though it is actually cultural. Choice of mates, values probably before the industrial revoilution were biological but with immigration these choices have become cultural in places like USA. A woman from one culture who was taught that hairy men were barbarians (she agreed with that concept in her native homeland!)now comes to USA then suddenly her choice changse due to the sociocultural milieu and knowledge that her present hairy partner has advantage and priviledge to make her lifestyle easier. Cultural or biological? Or perhaps, she knows which side her bread is buttered!

I am sure that culture has SOME infulence BUT for it to effect on an evolutionary scale, that influence must be borad over variosu cultures (almost uniform) AND be long lasting over many generations, perhaps 10's of 1000's of years.
History has shown us that is NOT the case.
Cultural standards are very flexible and NOT consistent and certianly NOT long lasting.
Remember the ideal "mate look" of the 60's?
Compare to that in the 50's or 70's or 90's, etc...
Sure, it seems that some cultures are less "fickled" than the N.American and central European ones, some cultures notion of sexual attractivness has barely changed over centuries of recored history.
BUT in those cases, what is viewed as "sexually attrractive" is not consistent that what has been stated in this thread.
Look at what is viewed as sexually attractive in Simoa VS CHina for example, or mongolia VS the Sudan.

[jdhowland]

[QUOTE=Fa Xing;1181494]... I think it stands to reason that the lack of body hair probably has more to do with our sexual attractiveness, and our adaptation to certain climates than anything else.QUOTE]

Hot climate and the need to walk or run for long distances. We developed more sweat glands and smaller hairs, to radiate heat.

That's what I think.

[Lee Chiang Po]

You really believe that?

So when evidence is shown, what's that? A lucky guess from a madman?

If it seems like lunacy to you maybe it's because you are just that far behind that you aren't capable of comprehending? Either that or you are just being closed to it and repeating somebody elses words. Either way WTF??? Everyday you enjoy a quality of life that is DIRECTLY related to their work? You drive a car? use kitchen appliances? Do you believe the concepts that allowed these things to be were the rantings of mad men? Just how far back do you need to be taken to actually understand what it is they're talking about? You understand that ideas like the 4 forces of interaction all had to start with one cat saying "a force is a push or a pull". Just because you don't see the connections does not mean that others are imagining them.


I can see how this field could make a man go mad tho. Especially the smarter ones.

Actually I do believe that. These guys usually do not believe in a God, but will believe in parallel dimentions or universes, dark matter, Warping of space, worm holes, and an endless convoy of insanity. We are letting a hand full of people play with millions or maybe even billions of our dollars. They are playing like kids with very expensive toys. Space exploration for instance. Just how close is the nearest possibility of life? A few thousand light years? Just who in the world could live that long, and providing they could travel at the speed of light. The universe is expanding as I type. Rapidly I might add. And the thought of space travel gets even more remote. We are stuck here on this rock, and we are not going anywhere and no one is coming here. Each day that goes by makes it even less likely. All that money that these fools are playing with could feed the hungry, or house the homeless, or it could do a good many things that would make a real difference. Even spending it on dope and booze would be better than throwing it into the sky.
And what difference does it make if we see proof of some energy particle? Just how is this going to change yours or my life? Or anyone elses for that matter? We can't eat the ****ed thing, and we can't drink it, and we can't fornicate with it, so what good is even knowing it exists? People can stand around and talk about how smart they are but it ends the same.
Warping space and time travel? You cannot warp what does not exist. Space exists simply because it doesn't exist. And time is simply a tool man had devised to measure the lapse between two events. It does not really exist either. Time is not a movie that can be moves forward or backwards. As things occur it just keeps moving forward. There is no speeding it up or slowing it up. Like the train and the pendelum clock that Einstein used to explain time travel. That is the most infantile thing I have ever seen, and those that actually agree with it have similar problems.
Look at this for instance. For agruements sake, say the pendelum is moving back and forth at 10 mph. It moves back and forth at the exact same speed. The train moves at 60 mph, so the forward stroke of the pendelum is moving forward at 70 mph. As the pendelum moves backwards it is opposite and you need to extract speed from it. It seems the only speed you extract is the speed of the pendelum because even though it moves backwards away from the forward motion of the train, it is still moving parallel at 60 mph. In reality however, the pendelum is moving in reverse at 70 mph. So any time gained by this motion would be reversed and the time would remain still. This will still not alter time simply because it does not exist.
As for electricity and internal combustion engines and such, it did not take a physicist to invent these things. They were dealing with what they held in their hands rather than something a billion light years away or so small that nothing can see it. Warping time and space and that sort of sillyness.

[Drake]

Posts like this make this place the absolute worst place on the internetz to go for any sort of scientific discussion.


And yes, that's saying a lot.

[SimonM]

Actually I do believe that. These guys usually do not believe in a God, but will believe in parallel dimentions or universes, dark matter, Warping of space, worm holes, and an endless convoy of insanity. We are letting a hand full of people play with millions or maybe even billions of our dollars. They are playing like kids with very expensive toys. Space exploration for instance. Just how close is the nearest possibility of life? A few thousand light years? Just who in the world could live that long, and providing they could travel at the speed of light. The universe is expanding as I type. Rapidly I might add. And the thought of space travel gets even more remote. We are stuck here on this rock, and we are not going anywhere and no one is coming here. Each day that goes by makes it even less likely. All that money that these fools are playing with could feed the hungry, or house the homeless, or it could do a good many things that would make a real difference. Even spending it on dope and booze would be better than throwing it into the sky.
And what difference does it make if we see proof of some energy particle? Just how is this going to change yours or my life? Or anyone elses for that matter? We can't eat the ****ed thing, and we can't drink it, and we can't fornicate with it, so what good is even knowing it exists? People can stand around and talk about how smart they are but it ends the same.
Warping space and time travel? You cannot warp what does not exist. Space exists simply because it doesn't exist. And time is simply a tool man had devised to measure the lapse between two events. It does not really exist either. Time is not a movie that can be moves forward or backwards. As things occur it just keeps moving forward. There is no speeding it up or slowing it up. Like the train and the pendelum clock that Einstein used to explain time travel. That is the most infantile thing I have ever seen, and those that actually agree with it have similar problems.
Look at this for instance. For agruements sake, say the pendelum is moving back and forth at 10 mph. It moves back and forth at the exact same speed. The train moves at 60 mph, so the forward stroke of the pendelum is moving forward at 70 mph. As the pendelum moves backwards it is opposite and you need to extract speed from it. It seems the only speed you extract is the speed of the pendelum because even though it moves backwards away from the forward motion of the train, it is still moving parallel at 60 mph. In reality however, the pendelum is moving in reverse at 70 mph. So any time gained by this motion would be reversed and the time would remain still. This will still not alter time simply because it does not exist.
As for electricity and internal combustion engines and such, it did not take a physicist to invent these things. They were dealing with what they held in their hands rather than something a billion light years away or so small that nothing can see it. Warping time and space and that sort of sillyness.

Wow!

You really don't understand general relativity at all, do you? Perhaps, before you declare the last century of physics useless you should look at what it has accomplished... like, oh, all the technology.

If you really want to feed the world de-fund a couple of the bigger and more wasteful armies. Also, your little comment about not believing in a god but "believing" in dark matter is telling. To solve your dilemma I suggest you turn off the magic box (computer) and join a conservative monastery. Preferrably one with a vow of silence.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Wow!

You really don't understand general relativity at all, do you? Perhaps, before you declare the last century of physics useless you should look at what it has accomplished... like, oh, all the technology.

If you really want to feed the world de-fund a couple of the bigger and more wasteful armies. Also, your little comment about not believing in a god but "believing" in dark matter is telling. To solve your dilemma I suggest you turn off the magic box (computer) and join a conservative monastery. Preferrably one with a vow of silence.

He does make SOMEWHAT of a valid point.
I know many a "scientific atheist" that discounts the silliness of God and supernatural beings BUT most certainily believe in the possibility of aliens, even the possibility that the "gods" of lore were just that, highly advanced aliens.
And they believe in parallel dimensions and multiple universe ( but of course discount "heaven" even though that is what heaven would indeed be).

I think that the "ingrained' reluctence to accept the "super natural" and yet admit the possibility of it as long as it is worded not as "supernatural" but "alternative scientific explanation" or as "quantum physiscs" ( or anything along those lines) just shows that many atheists have issues NOT with the supernatural, but with dogmatic religion that THEY view as outdated because, typically, they come with a set of morals that they do NOT care to follow.

[SimonM]

He does make SOMEWHAT of a valid point.
I know many a "scientific atheist" that discounts the silliness of God and supernatural beings BUT most certainily believe in the possibility of aliens, even the possibility that the "gods" of lore were just that, highly advanced aliens.
And they believe in parallel dimensions and multiple universe ( but of course discount "heaven" even though that is what heaven would indeed be).

I think that the "ingrained' reluctence to accept the "super natural" and yet admit the possibility of it as long as it is worded not as "supernatural" but "alternative scientific explanation" or as "quantum physiscs" ( or anything along those lines) just shows that many atheists have issues NOT with the supernatural, but with dogmatic religion that THEY view as outdated because, typically, they come with a set of morals that they do NOT care to follow.


I'm not fond of dogmatism regardless of the source but, within the contexts in which they apply the standard model of quantum physics and certainly general relativity are supported both by an abundance of experimental data and have in turn supported most modern technology in some form or other.

An example - the time / relative velocity issue he brought up was actually found accurate by sticking one synchronized atomic clock in a stationary lab and a second one on a supersonic aircraft. So his claims that time is a fixed quantity not subject to space-time distortion due to relative velocity or gravitational force is verifiably wrong.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I'm not fond of dogmatism regardless of the source but, within the contexts in which they apply the standard model of quantum physics and certainly general relativity are supported both by an abundance of experimental data and have in turn supported most modern technology in some form or other.

An example - the time / relative velocity issue he brought up was actually found accurate by sticking one synchronized atomic clock in a stationary lab and a second one on a supersonic aircraft. So his claims that time is a fixed quantity not subject to space-time distortion due to relative velocity or gravitational force is verifiably wrong.

Yes, I agree.
And I think that when science sticks to what it does best and was designed to do: comment and explain the natural world, that science is the way to go.
Some of the greatest scientists of the past were people that believed in an ordered universe and did so because they believed in a creator God that made it such.
What NO ONE has time for and what there is no room for, is religious dogma that tries to overrule science in things it has no business commenting on.
And while science, and physics in particular, can make very accurate statements on the HOW in this natural universe, it shouldn't try to go BEYOND what it was designed to do.

[jdhowland]

Yes, I agree.
And I think that when science sticks to what it does best and was designed to do: comment and explain the natural world, that science is the way to go.
Some of the greatest scientists of the past were people that believed in an ordered universe and did so because they believed in a creator God that made it such.
What NO ONE has time for and what there is no room for, is religious dogma that tries to overrule science in things it has no business commenting on.
And while science, and physics in particular, can make very accurate statements on the HOW in this natural universe, it shouldn't try to go BEYOND what it was designed to do.

Well put.

Natural philosophy arose not as an alternative to religious faith, but as a means of understanding the work of a presumed creative god. Because it was not bound by dogma it advanced beyond theology.

We may feel that there is a separation of methods between faith-based theology and speculative scientific thinking about our universe. But both are essentially the same thing--speculation driven by the need to understand our situation.

[Lucas]

Actually time is not made up, its been proven to exist. You might want to look into it first. Time fluctuations actually happen even in just our orbit. Every single satellite operates with a clock that adjusts for this fluctuation to keep its clock in sync with what we have on the planet. Hell our universe itself has plenty of evidence to squash the old thoughts that time was a man made idea. These things of proof we discovered far after we began to utilize time. Regardless though, its actually been proven. Time is not a theory any longer, its a law of the universe, of which its effects can be seen and measured. Just sayin

[sanjuro_ronin]

Actually time is not made up, its been proven to exist. You might want to look into it first. Time fluctuations actually happen even in just our orbit. Every single satellite operates with a clock that adjusts for this fluctuation to keep its clock in sync with what we have on the planet. Hell our universe itself has plenty of evidence to squash the old thoughts that time was a man made idea. These things of proof we discovered far after we began to utilize time. Regardless though, its actually been proven. Time is not a theory any longer, its a law of the universe, of which its effects can be seen and measured. Just sayin

Time is relative to OUR universe, it "started" when our universe started.
There is no reason to believe that IF there are other universes that time as we know it, works the same way there, if it "works" at all.

[SimonM]

Time is relative to OUR universe, it "started" when our universe started.
There is no reason to believe that IF there are other universes that time as we know it, works the same way there, if it "works" at all.

Assuming, of course, that the multiverse interpretation plays out. That's still debated. ;)

[sanjuro_ronin]

Assuming, of course, that the multiverse interpretation plays out. That's still debated. ;)

Of course, but the big bang postulates that times as we know it, started with the big bang.
Unless you are suggesting that time already existed before the universe came to be, are you?

[SimonM]

I'm saying that Cosmology remains a young science and there's a vigorous debate within it and no findings certain enough for me to willingly put forward as an Opinion. ;)

When dealing with science above my grade I try to wait until a bit of a consensus arises before putting forward an opinion and cosmology is definitely above my grade.

[sanjuro_ronin]

i'm saying that cosmology remains a young science and there's a vigorous debate within it and no findings certain enough for me to willingly put forward as an opinion. ;)

when dealing with science above my grade i try to wait until a bit of a consensus arises before putting forward an opinion and cosmology is definitely above my grade.

p u s s y :d

[SimonM]

Just an honest skeptic. :cool:

[sanjuro_ronin]

Just an honest skeptic. :cool:

Aren't we all :)

[Lucas]

even if there are multiple universe doesnt change the fact that in the one we inhabit, time is very real. thats like saying, well in another universe they dont have apples. so the apples here dont matter. OF COURSE THE FRAKIN APPLES MATTER!!! :mad:

:p

[sanjuro_ronin]

even if there are multiple universe doesnt change the fact that in the one we inhabit, time is very real. thats like saying, well in another universe they dont have apples. so the apples here dont matter. OF COURSE THE FRAKIN APPLES MATTER!!! :mad:

:p

Of course, we are "slaves" to this plane of existence regardless of our view about any other.
Of course for puny mortals like you, that must suck !
*puts on red cape and flies through window*

[Lucas]

so does that red cape come with blue tights and red undwear you wear on the OUTSIDE of your tights? :D

[sanjuro_ronin]

so does that red cape come with blue tights and red undwear you wear on the OUTSIDE of your tights? :D

http://cdn.walyou.com/wp-content/uploads//2012/01/Bra-Superman-e1326446157352.jpg

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://blog.thaeger.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Superhero-Costume-Parodies-Superman.jpeg

[Lucas]

Lol!!!!!!!

[PalmStriker]

Actually I do believe that. These guys usually do not believe in a God, but will believe in parallel dimentions or universes, dark matter, Warping of space, worm holes, and an endless convoy of insanity. We are letting a hand full of people play with millions or maybe even billions of our dollars. They are playing like kids with very expensive toys. Space exploration for instance. Just how close is the nearest possibility of life? A few thousand light years? Just who in the world could live that long, and providing they could travel at the speed of light. The universe is expanding as I type. Rapidly I might add. And the thought of space travel gets even more remote. We are stuck here on this rock, and we are not going anywhere and no one is coming here. Each day that goes by makes it even less likely. All that money that these fools are playing with could feed the hungry, or house the homeless, or it could do a good many things that would make a real difference. Even spending it on dope and booze would be better than throwing it into the sky.
And what difference does it make if we see proof of some energy particle? Just how is this going to change yours or my life? Or anyone elses for that matter? We can't eat the ****ed thing, and we can't drink it, and we can't fornicate with it, so what good is even knowing it exists? People can stand around and talk about how smart they are but it ends the same.
Warping space and time travel? You cannot warp what does not exist. Space exists simply because it doesn't exist. And time is simply a tool man had devised to measure the lapse between two events. It does not really exist either. Time is not a movie that can be moves forward or backwards. As things occur it just keeps moving forward. There is no speeding it up or slowing it up. Like the train and the pendelum clock that Einstein used to explain time travel. That is the most infantile thing I have ever seen, and those that actually agree with it have similar problems.
Look at this for instance. For agruements sake, say the pendelum is moving back and forth at 10 mph. It moves back and forth at the exact same speed. The train moves at 60 mph, so the forward stroke of the pendelum is moving forward at 70 mph. As the pendelum moves backwards it is opposite and you need to extract speed from it. It seems the only speed you extract is the speed of the pendelum because even though it moves backwards away from the forward motion of the train, it is still moving parallel at 60 mph. In reality however, the pendelum is moving in reverse at 70 mph. So any time gained by this motion would be reversed and the time would remain still. This will still not alter time simply because it does not exist.
As for electricity and internal combustion engines and such, it did not take a physicist to invent these things. They were dealing with what they held in their hands rather than something a billion light years away or so small that nothing can see it. Warping time and space and that sort of sillyness. AGREED ! Wasting Resources on Madness. (sheer).

[PalmStriker]

Of course, but the big bang postulates that times as we know it, started with the big bang.
Unless you are suggesting that time already existed before the universe came to be, are you?
Yes. Timelessnes has always been the standard, before jeans.

[Syn7]

Actually I do believe that. These guys usually do not believe in a God, but will believe in parallel dimentions or universes, dark matter, Warping of space, worm holes, and an endless convoy of insanity. We are letting a hand full of people play with millions or maybe even billions of our dollars. They are playing like kids with very expensive toys. Space exploration for instance. Just how close is the nearest possibility of life? A few thousand light years? Just who in the world could live that long, and providing they could travel at the speed of light. The universe is expanding as I type. Rapidly I might add. And the thought of space travel gets even more remote. We are stuck here on this rock, and we are not going anywhere and no one is coming here. Each day that goes by makes it even less likely. All that money that these fools are playing with could feed the hungry, or house the homeless, or it could do a good many things that would make a real difference. Even spending it on dope and booze would be better than throwing it into the sky.
And what difference does it make if we see proof of some energy particle? Just how is this going to change yours or my life? Or anyone elses for that matter? We can't eat the ****ed thing, and we can't drink it, and we can't fornicate with it, so what good is even knowing it exists? People can stand around and talk about how smart they are but it ends the same.
Warping space and time travel? You cannot warp what does not exist. Space exists simply because it doesn't exist. And time is simply a tool man had devised to measure the lapse between two events. It does not really exist either. Time is not a movie that can be moves forward or backwards. As things occur it just keeps moving forward. There is no speeding it up or slowing it up. Like the train and the pendelum clock that Einstein used to explain time travel. That is the most infantile thing I have ever seen, and those that actually agree with it have similar problems.
Look at this for instance. For agruements sake, say the pendelum is moving back and forth at 10 mph. It moves back and forth at the exact same speed. The train moves at 60 mph, so the forward stroke of the pendelum is moving forward at 70 mph. As the pendelum moves backwards it is opposite and you need to extract speed from it. It seems the only speed you extract is the speed of the pendelum because even though it moves backwards away from the forward motion of the train, it is still moving parallel at 60 mph. In reality however, the pendelum is moving in reverse at 70 mph. So any time gained by this motion would be reversed and the time would remain still. This will still not alter time simply because it does not exist.
As for electricity and internal combustion engines and such, it did not take a physicist to invent these things. They were dealing with what they held in their hands rather than something a billion light years away or so small that nothing can see it. Warping time and space and that sort of sillyness.

If you take all science has given you for granted then I suppose you wont see how any of it affects you. If you really can't see how one more peg in the standard model does not affect your life, then there isn't really anything I can say to you as I don't have the time or energy to write it all out.


You are mistaking theoretical physics with just plain physics. Electricity and combustion engines were of course built by scientists, regardless of whether they called themselves an inventor, a doctor or a physicist, it's all physics.

By the way, time and space are not two completely seperate concepts. If you want to argue against something, you might want to at least know the very basics of what it is you're arguing against.

[Syn7]

He does make SOMEWHAT of a valid point.
I know many a "scientific atheist" that discounts the silliness of God and supernatural beings BUT most certainily believe in the possibility of aliens, even the possibility that the "gods" of lore were just that, highly advanced aliens.
And they believe in parallel dimensions and multiple universe ( but of course discount "heaven" even though that is what heaven would indeed be).

I think that the "ingrained' reluctence to accept the "super natural" and yet admit the possibility of it as long as it is worded not as "supernatural" but "alternative scientific explanation" or as "quantum physiscs" ( or anything along those lines) just shows that many atheists have issues NOT with the supernatural, but with dogmatic religion that THEY view as outdated because, typically, they come with a set of morals that they do NOT care to follow.

Yeah but in all reality, the statistical probabilities on either side are light years apart. Given the enormity or the universe the odds are so remore that there is NOT some other form of life somewhere. Then you have god, a concept that is so hard to quantify you can't even really put a probability to it, yet if you step back and think about it, whatever that number is, it has to be less than the 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999 percent on the other end.


Just sayin. :o

[Syn7]

Yes, I agree.
And I think that when science sticks to what it does best and was designed to do: comment and explain the natural world, that science is the way to go.
Some of the greatest scientists of the past were people that believed in an ordered universe and did so because they believed in a creator God that made it such.
What NO ONE has time for and what there is no room for, is religious dogma that tries to overrule science in things it has no business commenting on.
And while science, and physics in particular, can make very accurate statements on the HOW in this natural universe, it shouldn't try to go BEYOND what it was designed to do.

It wasn't designed with such limitations because it wasn't designed at all. It is what it is and has many manifestations that are just as valid as their counterparts. The only issue I have is with assumptions that skew conclusions and purposely manipulated data in order to influence politics and religion. Other than that i don't see why it should have any limitations at all. In fact the idea of putting limitations on thought is counterproductive to the whole point.

[Syn7]

Assuming, of course, that the multiverse interpretation plays out. That's still debated. ;)

I always liked the many worlds idea. Possibility is actuality. It's out there, but intriguing and brilliant regardless of how true it is. We'll see, I guesss.

[Syn7]

I'm saying that Cosmology remains a young science and there's a vigorous debate within it and no findings certain enough for me to willingly put forward as an Opinion. ;)

When dealing with science above my grade I try to wait until a bit of a consensus arises before putting forward an opinion and cosmology is definitely above my grade.

Word...............

[sanjuro_ronin]

It wasn't designed with such limitations because it wasn't designed at all. It is what it is and has many manifestations that are just as valid as their counterparts. The only issue I have is with assumptions that skew conclusions and purposely manipulated data in order to influence politics and religion. Other than that i don't see why it should have any limitations at all. In fact the idea of putting limitations on thought is counterproductive to the whole point.

You have to put "limitations" on things.
Using something for what it was NOT designed for is silly and counter-productive.
Trying to use science to explain things it was not "designed' for is counter-productive.
Science comments on the natural universe we live in, limited to our perception of reality.
Science is limited by those that "practice" it, our ability to understand it and by the very rules it functions in: Experimentation, repeatability, etc.
We don't so much as impose limits on science as we recognize that those limits exist and work within them.

[SimonM]

AGREED ! Wasting Resources on Madness. (sheer).

2012 US Military budget: $1.030–$1.415 trillion
Total cost of the LHC project: $4.4 billion

So, just for the record, one year of US military spending is the same price tag as 250 LHC projects.

ONE YEAR!

What's wasting resources on madness (sheer) again?

[PalmStriker]

My point exactly. Trillions of markers, wasted . Human driven madness accelerating planetary in-sustainability:(.

[SimonM]

No, I think you misunderstand my point if you think it in any way supports yours.

To be more explicit - the most expensive super-project advancing scientific knowledge is less than one per cent of the US "defense" budget for one year. Advancing human knowledge is a worthy goal. Perpetuating a crumbling empire is not.

One is wasteful.

The other is not.

(A hint, the one that isn't spent on extrajudicial executions and overseas occupations is the one that isn't wasteful.)

[Syn7]

I don't go around telling random people why I feel a belief in any god is a weakness, so I don't understand why so many feel the need to tell me why it gives them strength. I don't care. This is a science thread that has nothing to do with Christianity other than the fact that it's called the god particle and I made a multi-pun about the phrasing. It was not an invitation to discuss the bridges and breaks between religion and science. Science is my religion and we have many venerable priests.

OK, just needed to get that out. Let's not go there any more, at least not in this thread.


So if science is used to describe environment and our perception of said environment, what exactly does that not cover? Science is a very broad term. Theoretical physics, for example, is more philosophy than science but it is based on verifiable physics at its roots. So is theoretical physics not science then, only philosophy and therefore doesn't count in your analysis or do you feel that theoretical physics is limited and doesn't belong in some areas of thought and if so could you please list a few examples of where it does NOT belong? I'm trying to follow you here, but at this point I'm not feelin ya.

Science is not the kind of thing where you can jump ahead. Growth must be organic and flow naturally otherwise false conclusions are forced and that isn't science. It's biased opinion not rooted in fact. That being said, I can't imagine any area it couldn't grow in to. I mean, when newton did all that work I doubt he ever had even an inkling of where that would end up. Do you think the inventor of the scorpion ever dreamed of laser guided missiles? Think of all we stumble on, who knows where it will end up. That's the whole point. That's why it's so fascinating, because it doesn't have these kinds of limitations you see everywhere else.


Just to be clear tho, this thread is not a "science" thread, it's a physics thread.

[Drake]

This is a science thread













Just to be clear tho, this thread is not a "science" thread, it's a physics thread.

Uh... clear as mud.

[Syn7]

Did anyone read my posts and not understand that I was saying this thread is not a religious discussion or even a general science discussion, it's a physics thread. Was anyone confused by that??? or was it just drake? Anyone want to come to his defense? Anyone at all?

I feel sorry for people who live off sound bites and mini quotes taken out of context. It's becoming the norm in this self righteous over saturated and misinformation and/or disinformation era. Of course if you aren't lying about your career, you should be quite adept at both of these, it's your bread and butter.


Seriously, are you that obtuse or were you just looking to criticize because in the past I have offended you? No, of course you would never admit either. That is what children and j3rkoffs do. Which are you? I'm hoping for the former, of course if that were the case you wouldn't have the faculties to actually know it.

Either way, I don't really have anything to say to you till you man up, grow a pair, and answer my response to YOUR challenge.

Stop being such a douche and be for real. Prolly don't even have the nuttz to answer this. In your sad lil mind I'm sure you feel you take the high road firing a shot outta nowhere then hunkering down. :rolleyes:

I used to like you, even though we disagreed on a lot, I thought you were an ok guy. Then you started getting all ego bruised when I spoke my mind and turned sour. Don't be so weak minded and we can still be friends. Of course if this offends you even more, then I doubt you have the capacity to swallow this and move on in a positive way, but I am hopeful.

I am more than willing and will even be the first to extend my hand and offer friendship. If you can handle my outspoken honestly and have a convo/argument without being offended, let me know.

[Drake]

What challenge? This is the internet, and even though I explained myself, in all actuality, I don't owe you a god **** thing. I don't do e-challenges. With anyone.

You contradicted yourself in the same post. Deal with it.

[bawang]

you are a shameful and disgraceful human being. you are not mentally fit to train kung fu.

[Drake]

you are a shameful and disgraceful human being. you are not mentally fit to train kung fu.

Don't need kung fu when I can just use a crowbar.

[Syn7]

What you really need to do is clean the sand outta your vijajay!:rolleyes: