Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

energy physics and the Divine attributes

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by selfreasoning4all View Post
    Before I can highlight the physics I need to share with you a new piece of epistemology that advances physics;

    Inductions solely derived from observations are called scientific facts.
    Of course not. No scientist would call a proposed explanation of any set of observations a "fact". Indeed, in science there ARE no facts, since every observation is a model of some lower level of abstraction.

    So what we have is some set of observations, always to some degree incomplete and ambiguous. Then we have people collecting sets of observations and drawing tentative conclusions about their causes and relationships. Not everyone selects the same set of observations for many reasons. For example, some observations available to some may not be available to others. For example, WHICH facts are relevant and should be included depends on the tentative explanation of their relationshps and causes. For example, observations may have been taken differently - at different times, different places, using different instruments, etc. etc. Getting any two observations to "match up" so that everyone agrees these are observations of the same thing is quite difficult.

    So your attempt to use Pure Reason to derive your foregone conclusion founders on the uncertainty, ambiguity, and limitations of your premises. When the Real World must be distorted beyond all recognition in order to force foregone conclusions, it makes me nervous.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by tabibito View Post
      Does any of this science prove that this eternal energy would be incapable in the course of eternity, of developing sentience?
      It is self-causal, which is self-deterministic, which means consciousness, i.e. self-awareness, and obviously self-reasoning; where cause is reason.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
        1) Observe an egg. Concluding that it's from a chicken is not induction but observation based on a previous observation.
        1. you see chicken laying an egg 2. you find another egg that looks like that chicken egg; therefore the egg you found is a chicken egg

        This looks like a deduction.


        2) There are MANY theological words that are not used in the Bible; including omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, Trinity...
        Supernatural is a standard term.
        Granted, but where is the scripture that would even imply the existence of anything supernatural, save a miracle that humans don't understand?


        3) In what sense is energy "conscious" -- this is a huge mistake in your "induction".
        every cause involves energy and every effect involves energy, therefore the eternal and omnipresent energy is self-causal or self-deterministic; self-determinism is consciousness

        4) At BEST you are supporting a form of pantheism.
        monistic pantheism

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
          Of course you're aware that the Planck Length is the limit in size for any process involving energy since G and h break down into "quantum foam" at that scale.
          Well, that is only true for the hydrogen atom. In cases where there is more than one electron (such as in materials), the "Planck Length" can be any size, all the way done to the limit of zero in catylitic processes.

          Ergo, Energy cannot be "infinite", again in any standard definition of the term. Do you want to redefine "infinite" as well?
          In every single point in space there is a (longitudinal, transverse, and pulsed) radiation convergence, which converging to the zero point increase the flux density to infinity!

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
            Time-translational symmetry is equivalent to conservation of energy. In a closed system dS >= 0 so entropy gives a "arrow" to time, so time is not "reversible" -- unless you believe our universe is infinite.
            if energy cannot be created, then it never was created

            are you denying this?


            Do you believe our universe is infinite and thus a thermodynamically open system?
            I don't know if the universe' extension is infinite; however, if it were infinite, how would it be an open system?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by phank View Post
              Of course not. No scientist would call a proposed explanation of any set of observations a "fact". Indeed, in science there ARE no facts, since every observation is a model of some lower level of abstraction.
              concrete particular observables do get generalized (induction), which is of course abstraction; and yes science is usually theorized to be reductive, i.e. we try to postulate the macroscopic phenomena from the models of the microscopic.

              However, there might be holism

              And anyway, even if the "microscopic" models (or definitions/abstractions) are incomplete (as they inherently are if one uses induction (i.e. problem of induction), we still have a scientific fact if it is in every interpretation completely in harmony with every known observation


              So your attempt to use Pure Reason to derive your foregone conclusion founders on the uncertainty, ambiguity, and limitations of your premises.
              ALL science suffers from the problem of induction, not just my reasoning in the OP.

              However, you might notice that my premises are the least uncertain, least ambiguious, of all know physics!!!


              When the Real World must be distorted beyond all recognition in order to force foregone conclusions, it makes me nervous.
              mysticality tends to advance science

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by selfreasoning4all View Post
                mysticality tends to advance science
                by virtue of providing emotional fuel

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                  ???

                  Oy gevalt!

                  BTW, "Jehovah" is an awful transliteration of the Tetragrammaton.

                  K54
                  Wow... Klaus and I agree on something...


                  That's what
                  - She

                  Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                  - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                  I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                  - Stephen R. Donaldson

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                    Wow... Klaus and I agree on something...


                    The universe will shortly implode.

                    K54

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                      Absolutely not.

                      Unless, or course, Selfie uses his personal definition of sentience.

                      This combined with his broad definition of "Divine" proves at least that his syfy story NOT is demonstrating theism.

                      K54
                      P.S. Added the NOT!!!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                        ???

                        Oy gevalt!

                        BTW, "Jehovah" is an awful transliteration of the Tetragrammaton.

                        K54
                        Here's where he mentions the identity of a few of them.

                        Originally posted by selfreasoning4all
                        btw, I was disfellowshiped for reproving the Governing Body on a private forum.

                        I reproved them for taking money from a military corporation, and for their association with the UN.

                        I can't return because I believe the scriptures say Jehovah is omnipresent, and because I now here voices, that include but are not limited to; Jehovah, Jesus, Michael, Gabriel, Azazel, Odin, Simiel, etc.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                          P.S. Added the NOT!!!
                          Might want to put it after the "is".

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
                            Might want to put it after the "is".
                            Oops!!! Fumble fingers again. Not is good typing...

                            Originally posted by Selfie
                            Btw, I was disfellowshiped for reproving the Governing Body on a private forum.

                            I reproved them for taking money from a military corporation, and for their association with the UN.

                            I can't return because I believe the scriptures say Jehovah is omnipresent, and because I now here voices, that include but are not limited to; Jehovah, Jesus, Michael, Gabriel, Azazel, Odin, Simiel, etc.
                            Well, he went from confusing to entertaining (in the Schadenfreude sense) very quickly...

                            K54

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by selfreasoning4all View Post
                              Well, that is only true for the hydrogen atom. In cases where there is more than one electron (such as in materials), the "Planck Length" can be any size, all the way done to the limit of zero in catylitic processes.



                              In every single point in space there is a (longitudinal, transverse, and pulsed) radiation convergence, which converging to the zero point increase the flux density to infinity!
                              Have you perfected the Flux Capacitor yet?

                              K54

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                                Have you perfected the Flux Capacitor yet?
                                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flux_density

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                                48 responses
                                135 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                                16 responses
                                74 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X