If you believe in God, refute this! - Page 76

Originally posted by: Freethinker112

Then do it, as I have said many times. But you have to offer some improvement over the current ones. It's not that we change models just for the heck of it. Otherwise people will be like, round Earth is so mainstream, time to get the flat model in. 😆 <<< The same was believed when science knew zilch about earth ..People also called Galileo a mug for stating that Earth is not the center of the universe ..The fact though remained unharmed .and people reckoned that only when Galileo was gone ...You are doing the same ...You ll only recognize my views and approbation would be in place ..when I'm gone ..Which is cruel 😭

Pointlike particles doesn't mean they are dimensionless. Electron is a fundamental particle which means that we cannot see any substructure at the scales we can probe. Which is nearly 10^-18 m. At these scales too electron seem pointlike. But it does not mean it is dimensionless but that we can't see below it. Like a grain of salt may seem pointlike to you but it isn't. It's all matter of scale.

Unless we know what are "thoughts", we can't say anything about it. Oh! Wow 😆 ...So you know that the electron despite of being a point object has definite dimensions ..So you should be able to tell its dimensions 3D ? 2 D ? 😆 ..Obviously a model can't be drawn ..and even the speculations can't be made cause it needs some basis.. And Oh! We can't be complacent omitting the Non Rotating black holes which effect phenomena such as time dilation ..Again such a body is known to have No Volume or dimensions ..We can't keep surmising they have finite dimensions cause the same can't be observed... So you too must refute this to refute my statement of existence of a dimensionless body with scientific evidence ..A Model that is ..

Actually on mass and momentum, not just momentum. A stationary object held at some height has potential energy. And yes, electrons have energy. Energy is a property of an object. Energy is not a separate thing. I would again resort to the same argument ..How could a non rotating black hole with ZERO mass be called an object ..and how can it have energy ..

Please read up on reflex arc. I am not going to post the same thing again and again. Reflex actions are decided by spinal cord not brain. Please Re read why I emphasized on the Reflex Acton ..Reflex actions must be immediate .. they can't keep happening over a period .Say like 10 or 15 minutes .. <<< That was the whole point ..Not that who fosters such actions ..If Spinal cord was to be in the picture .the actions wouldnta lasted for over a second ..Which means there was some kind of energy that moved the body , not the Reflex Actions engendered by the Spinal cord .

Electron was moving before the cell was formed. There was no divine interruption. Otherwise everything has soul.

Electrons are very stable. It can be annihilated with positron, which will release photons which are energy. So, energy in it will never be destroyed. Death is the end of consciousness, right. Where does that "energy" reside, and how is it propagated back? <<<< We can't be sure where the electrons reside...That they have a indefinite position .and still are charged with energy ..So how do you expect me to tell you exact location of the Soul in a body ? I might argue it resides in every electron that the body has or may be at some place peculiar to that ..

Please read instead of blindly repeating stuff. They are not dimensionless in the sense you are thinking, pointlike does not actually mean a point. And as I said before, we just don't randomly change things because it is too mainstream.

But electron gives probability of existence. And it has other detectable properties. And we know about its interactions. <<<< The point is I don't go reading your posts with my Blabber Full ...and write a hasty reply so that I can head to the right bowl to empty that .. 😆 A. Its not pointlike ..Its indeed a POINT OBJECT as described by the scientists...And what is a detectable property ? The electrical charge ? Oh! Bonzer ..Then how do be detect the neutrons ? They are neutral in charge ..The thoughts are detectable too cause you present them before us ..And yeah the thoughts are created ..that is why they can be manipulated after evaluation ..So you must refute the existence of the thoughts or present us with their structure and dimensions ..( And in that event your username should match the concept ..I suggest a FreePhysicist as a better suited name than Freethinker 😆 ) Neither of which can be done ...But we don't rule out their existence for that ...

And how exactly is that supposed to say that there is a soul? Body grows and changes so there is a soul? What kind of reasoning is that? <<<< I was on about the changes that a human body goes through ..and even if it changes in appearance so much so that no one (Including yourself ) can recognize that ..Its YOU within yourself who can still reckon your existence...If that wasn't the case you should become a different person altogether every couple of decades when your body changes its physical properties ...But that doesn't happen ..Which means YOU still remain the same ..Even when the material body is gone ...and the energy that you are is absorbed by another body which then you start reckoning as you for that lifespan ..Your ability to recognize yourself in spite of the enormous changes in your body is in indication of your existence beyond that ...If I put you to sleep by casting a spell on ya for like 20 years ...You might not recognize your body ..but still ask Who I am ? << Which means you are recognizing your existence without recognizing your body / shape 😛

Again you haven't answered most of my questions ..They just strike you and get absorbed by you never to be seen again ..So here you resemble a Big Platonic Black hole 😆that sucks in all difficult to answer questions ... I asked you to define the Life Cycle of an Electron ..Do all electrons inevitably become photons? If not what happens to the electrons and the energy therein inside a dead body ? Or do they remaine lock inside of one's grave forever ? 😆 Or what happens when the body is burnt ? And if you say they remain the same in number ..the Body kept in a glass casket must not decay and shrink ..While we know even the mummies do ..😆


Vintu

52 more pages. Then everyone will have to shut up or start afresh. 😆

this debate will never get old!

Originally posted by: Vintage.Wine

<<< The same was believed when science knew zilch about earth ..People also called Galileo a mug for stating that Earth is not the center of the universe ..The fact though remained unharmed .and people reckoned that only when Galileo was gone ...You are doing the same ...You ll only recognize my views and approbation would be in place ..when I'm gone ..Which is cruel 😭

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

52 more pages. Then everyone will have to shut up or start afresh. 😆

Originally posted by: LOVE_DMG

this debate will never get old!

Originally posted by: Aya.

People are desperate ! 😆

black holes and such are just mathematical toys, as is spacetime and time travel and the rest of the science fiction we've been using. IMO Our understanding of these phenomena is currently limited to our ability to model them mathematically, much like we model weather phenomena using forecasting models which are often wrong. Physics is about particles, their properties and their interactions, much as one might want to believe physics is math. I think even general relativity theory is a math trick, unless you believe space is really curved. In other words, we still dont have an understanding of the phenomena called gravity even though we can use the math equations to predict it. So let's not suggest that just because we have some math (which we pass off as physics) that we really understand many of the physical phenomena. And historically speaking, nearly all scientific theories have originated from what people once considered as myths. But let's face it- what we have today is a lot of math that is empirically verifiable or testable, so we accept it as scientifically proved, even when they dont have any counterpart in nature. Conversely, just because something is not currently verifiable does not make it false. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it just might be a duck, even though we might not be able to experimentally prove it. Like others have said before, if we are looking for scientific proofs, i dont think we'll get there. So why not come up with our own theories. If folks had dismissed previous myths as "blind speculations", we would have never gotten to the math models we have today, incomplete or unsatisfactory as these might be in REALLY explaining various phenomena.

Originally posted by: Freethinker112

Of course there is a need for improving the models Birdie, that's what the scientists are doing. But if you think blind speculations combined with untestable hypothesis is an improvement, then I don't know if there can be a reply to that. 😕