Search results

Mr. Ujvarosy's Frontline Science appears to me to be just another fundamentalist christian "front," for promoting theology as science. John A. Davison is an ex-professor from the University of Vermont, who proposes essentially that evolution was front-loaded by person/entity unknown, and that...

Your logic is incorrect, as follows: If you can't falsify #1, because you don't believe you are competent to argue good science, then you can't argue that #2 is the default, because you don't actually know whether #1 is false -- you're simply relying on your faith that it is not true. #2...

The above is an admission that there are three possible answers(AP, design, M-theory), rather than only two (design, M-theory). It's merely your opinion that #1 is sticking one's head in sand. It is no more nor less likely that #1 or #2 is true, and there is no way to resolve the truth from...

You're being unnecessarily paranoid. I'm not trying to set you up. Substantively, you keep using Susskind's "New Scientist" interview from December 2005, as a defense of your position. The Paula Gordon Radio Show interview, from February 2006, that I provided you a while back in this...

Have you ever watched the PBS/Nova presentation The Elegant Universe? If not, then please do, because it may change your perception of the issues.

Well, your argument is demonstrably wrong, based on all the evidence cited by myself, others and even by yourself. And, as you seem unable/unwilling to define the most important linchpin of your argument, this explains, to me at least, why you are misunderstanding the science as supporting...

I see. But, what is YOUR definition of anthropic principle?

OK, assuming you're right, and physicists can predict the cause of the universe via quantum mechanics, then what are the odds and what's the cause? As for Hawking's quote, I don't see how anything he says disagrees with anything I've said. Which makes me think that you may be defining...

You guess wrong. Weinberg views those who are attempting to make a faith based argument as outliers to the actual parties in interest: those who propose a grand unified theory of creation vs. those who propose an nearly infinite number of of unascertainable theories. The facts are: (1)...

I've read this article before, too. Weinberg is presenting the controversy between cosmologists who would prefer the Standard Model of the universe -- which implies that a grand unified theory which is entirely testable via the scientific method is possible, vis-a-vis some sort of string theory...

Thanks for your research. I've read this article before. The article is premised on assumptions, expressly called out in the last paragraph -- one of which is: "there is a fundamental cosmological constant." The above statement is unprovable, because we don't have any other universe in which...

LOL. I'll report your findings to the prize committee immediately! That was the point, of course. If the probability is equal then you can't use any regression function to determine causation for the cosmological constant. And, where the evidence neither supports or refutes a conclusion, the...

If during the past four days, the tempreture trended up 1 degree per day, then what is the probability that tomorrow will be 1 degree warmer than today? Answer this question from no more facts than I've provided and you will win the Nobel Prize in both Physics and Math.

I'm not an arbiter of probability calculations. This is no different than people who attempt to use linear regression to trend the market. The mathematical lemmas upon which linear regression depends, states that all of the data must be between the endpoints. Yet, technical...

A probability calculation is totally dependent upon (1) definite and certain knowledge of the contents of the set of all possible outcomes (which may be statistical), or (2) the premise that mulitiple trials can be conducted to empirically determine the probabilities. Without one or the...

If there is only one universe, then probability theory cannot be used to predict whether or not our being here is due to accident or design, because we cannot conduct any further independent trials. If there are multiple universes, or there is a megaverse, then a distribution of cosmological...

Numbers added to your quote below are for convenience correlating my response. 1. Susskind was making a joke with the "phish." 2. Weinberg's postulate is, that in order for the universe to become less homogeneous so that stars could form but not be torn apart by repulsive forces, that...

You need to watch Susskind's slide presentation. See: http://www.nyas.org/snc/rw/48/presentation/player.html The debate between physicists/cosmologists which you believe is about chance v. design, is not. The debate (among physicists/cosmologists) is about whether or not there is a unique...

My "common sense" does not lead me to "look" at the world around us and see things as obviously designed. As I pointed out in a previous post, within the human-engineered confines of a vacant lot, the contents of the lot has the "common sense" appearance of a randomly distributed mess. In...

Rebuttal Argument. If you are relying on the NYAS.org website's editorial summary describing Dr. Susskind's presentation, as a means of arguing that you have proved your point and that I have conceded your position as correct, then I think you are being mislead by the editor's own...