If you believe in God, refute this! - Page 106

Created

Last reply

Replies

1.1k

Views

60.4k

Users

37

Likes

762

Frequent Posters

_Angie_ thumbnail
Anniversary 16 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: K.Universe.



The spin is a half quantum number (magnitude). The direction (magnetic moment) in which it spins is dependent on the vantage point from which it is being "seen". Whether I am spinning clockwise or anticlockwise, I am still K :) The direction can be made to change. The equation to calculate the magnetic moment is the same for all electrons. All electrons have identical characteristics and properties which is why Feynman proposed the one electron universe hypothesis.

http://io9.com/5876966/what-if-every-electron-in-the-universe-was-all-the-same-exact-particle


No wonder Vintu has been on about the electron souls πŸ˜†
Vintage.Wine thumbnail
Anniversary 12 Thumbnail Group Promotion 3 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: _Angie_



Blimey ! Angie ...πŸ˜›

That was the very reason I yelled " Eurekaaa " πŸ˜ƒ when I first saw your posts here .. That was the only reason I kept traversing the shonky physics waters ...I woulda drowned for sure ..but then came you ..Sailing my rescue vessel ..πŸ˜† ...Give me your hand ...I ll quickly get aboard that ...and believe me ( Or not πŸ˜† ) Angie ..together we would reach the shores of MOKSHA ...The utter happiness ...only to call that togetherness ! πŸ˜†

Hic !

Vintu πŸ˜›

-Believe- thumbnail
Anniversary 18 Thumbnail Group Promotion 7 Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: Freethinker112


Now you are just being lazy. πŸ˜› πŸ˜†

suchiiiπŸ˜† I was thinking about becoming an atheist, but I thought screw it, u don't get any holidays and other amazing acts...πŸ˜‰πŸ˜†
Freethinker112 thumbnail
Anniversary 12 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum

can i answer? I think it's just you who is confused. Just trying to be helpful because you askedπŸ˜†


Really? So you figured everything out? I must have missed that post. πŸ˜† Writing that at the end, separate from paragraph meant I find all the various scenarios and possibilities confusing and exciting. 😊


Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum

now here's why- you earlier found spacetime and all the curvature that goes with it physical reality. Why? Because it was math. Now take 0. You dont see that as reality despite the fact that it is integral to math. Without 0, you'd not have any of the nice spacetime math to begin with. Think about it.

but if you are still confused, try this experiment. Ask someone whose bank balance runs down to 0. They earn X and they spend X. Result is their bank balance remains at 0. No change. Zilch. Of course it's no fun couching all that in math lingo, but it's as real as real can be. Just need to put the right "interpretation" on "earn" and "spend", with one having a minus sign. Now where have we heard the word "interpretation" before!πŸ˜†


Again, I said maths was a language in which we were trying to explain what is out there, not that the reality is following our language.

And no, even when there is 0 balance, money went to somebody. Money did not just disappear. That's what I meant, can we get "nothing" in reality.
Freethinker112 thumbnail
Anniversary 12 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum

yeah sure, We start with nothing. Suddenly the nothing decides to transform into things that cancel each other. The big bang thing you know. Things like that happen randomly, dont they?πŸ˜› πŸ˜†


just distilling the essence of all the lepto-klepto discourses we've gotten ourselves into.πŸ˜†


After which I said it was just pure speculation on my part. It is just a possibility if total energy of Universe is zero. Which is not something we know.
Freethinker112 thumbnail
Anniversary 12 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum

hahaha shmaarrt boyπŸ˜†


again i think that we'll get to a certain point playing mechano mechano trying to explain how things works, then we get stuck for a 100 years. After that we find a glitch and we are sent scampering for new theories and ideas...

now whether we believe in God or not, however rational or irrational we might find those beliefs to be, question is can we ever expect to go beyond things we can only measure using our classical world-view? Take GR. At the end of the day, we still evaluate results using "classical" devices. Add to that a scientific philosophy that is always looking for cause and effect. Can science deal with something that is non-causal? If not, then fine, we cannot prove existence. But then why come at it from an arrogant viewpoint that says it isn't so, and it isn't so because we cant prove things scientifically? I find that mentality as rigid as all the religious dogmas that we have been decrying. And no, i dont know what else we can do about it. The scientific method is still the best we have. But it is far from satisfactory in even beginning to get at what else there might be. Can it prove definitely that there isnt something else? I dont think so.


Yes, we will always be searching for new theories and ideas, because it is obvious that current ones don't explain everything. Otherwise there wouldn't be anything we didn't know. But it's still better than attributing the cause of everything we can't explain to an entity about which we have no idea. That's just shifting the fault. When we are out f depth, we put it to an entity which we can't explain. That will get us stuck and we would get nowhere.

About "classical" method, I don't know why you make it out to be so bad of a thing. We will try to understand from our point of view, won't we? And it still didn't limit us, QM came up which contradicts classical view. That's how we progress, that's how we answer the lies of complaint you make, our limiting view. We try to understand things at small scale and how does it give rise to large ones. And you point at the limitations as if it is meant to underestimate all the work that has gone into it. What would we have if we have followed your way. Everything will be mystical. Why try to understand something? Our view is very "limited", you will never be able to make sense of it all. We wouldn't know a thing if we followed that mentality. Maybe we will hit a wall one day and may not be able to make progress further. Or maybe that day won't come. Who knows? What we know is today is not that day and we have to take our understanding one way forward.
Freethinker112 thumbnail
Anniversary 12 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

Question I would like to pose, and this is open to all but I guess I am specifically directing this at Freethinker, Birdie and Vintu:

What kind of a random process creates gazillions of electrons with identical properties?!

Imagine trillions and trillions of particle ALL of equal mass, equal charge and same spin / magnetic dipole moment.

It's not about creation. I am not getting into that. The question is about being identical, randomly.


I am sorry but I don't exactly understand what you are trying to ask. Electrons are the fundamental particles, not built of any sub-particles. If you have something built by parts, you can vary them by varying the order and arrangement of its parts. But if something doesn't have substructure, wouldn't it be the same? Please elaborate because I didn't get linking random with electron. 😊
Freethinker112 thumbnail
Anniversary 12 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: Prometeus


suchiiiπŸ˜† I was thinking about becoming an atheist, but I thought screw it, u don't get any holidays and other amazing acts...πŸ˜‰πŸ˜†


No, but we can't refuse the holidays, you know. Can't go about offending theists. πŸ˜† So, you get holiday but without the rituals and rules. πŸ˜‰
Freethinker112 thumbnail
Anniversary 12 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: _Angie_


No wonder Vintu has been on about the electron souls πŸ˜†


I know you are joking, but just in case Vintu gets serious. That hypothesis is in no way related to what Vintu was saying. It says that there is only one electron and all electrons that we observe are the same one but in various times. While, Vintu was saying souls reside in electrons.
Freethinker112 thumbnail
Anniversary 12 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
@Vintu

There is no evidence that there is a God named Krishna. It's called mythology ad not history for a reason.

And again ,everything is not the part of same "energy". Everybody is composed of matter which have energy. And energy does not "create" it just changes form. We don't even know how all the energy came to be. And what exactly is being one again? And no, for Moksha you need soul which we still don't know if does exist.

And if everything was "created" from energy, nobody like Krishna would be able to tell you it all. Because energy isn't conscious and doesn't have "memory".
Top