Atheists, agnostics most knowledgeable about religion, survey says

Quote from stu:

I didn't add the word "just" in there. YOU did.
Like I say, at least retain some honesty.
More...
So I did, my bad.

... you question the laws of physics as they apply to a universe from nothing.
More...
Probably because I have yet to see any proven LAWS of physics that states an entire universe can appear from nothing.

... a universe from nothing - being the subject of theoretical physics, is quite a separate matter from the Laws of Physics...
More...
THIS (right or wrong) is what I've been saying.
 
LMAO!!!! It's not "known how much dark energy there is," it's estimated. It's not even known if dark energy really exists. Dark energy is just the current best guess as to why the expansion of the universe seems to be accelerating. Yet again you prove your STUpidity.

Speaking of STUpidity, you were clueless about dark energy until I schooled you here:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2952513#post2952513
So drop the facade and quit pretending you know what you're talking about.

Quote from STUpid:

It's known how much dark energy there is, so it is not "only a hypothesis." any more than Evolution is "just a THEORY".
More...
 
Quote from Trader666:
LMAO!!!! It's not "known how much dark energy there is," it's estimated.
More...

Yea ok TrollZZzzz.
The amount of dark energy is known.
Just because you don't know it's known, doesn't make it estimated.
 
Quote from Lucrum:
So I did, my bad.

Probably because I have yet to see any proven LAWS of physics that states an entire universe can appear from nothing.

THIS (right or wrong) is what I've been saying.
More...

I appreciate you acknowledged your bad, but still, did you REALLY not realize you typed that?
As I asked before, did you after all, intend to misrepresent the meaning of theory as it pertains to science?
It's a very misleading and particular false statement out of many which some religious belief 'ers often like to blunder around with.
I'm sure you're not oblivious to that.




"I have no issue with proven laws of physics."

Then you have "no issue" also with proven laws of physics which allow for gravity ?

If you have an 'issue' with gravity, which would you question ? .... the laws of physics that allow for it... or the scientific theory of gravity?
So having an issue with a universe from nothing..... why would you question the laws of physics that allow for it ( WHAT LAWS.. is 'what you have been saying' ) ... rather than to question the scientific theoretical physics of a universe from nothing?

So again that’s why I suggest you question , WHAT it is you are questioning?

Nevertheless, the laws of physics allow for both. One reason neither can be... "just a THEORY".
 
Quote from stu:

... did you after all, intend to misrepresent the meaning of theory as it pertains to science?
More...
No.
Definition of THEORY
1
: the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2
: abstract thought : speculation
3
: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art ...
5
: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>
6
a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption : conjecture c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject <theory of equations>

Then you have "no issue" also with proven laws of physics which allow for gravity ?
More...
No, but then these are known and observable. I see and can feel the effects of gravity. NO ONE witnessed the big bang universe appearing out of nowhere.

So having an issue with a universe from nothing..... why would you question the laws of physics that allow for it...
More...
Easy, once AGAIN I have not seen and you have not provided ANY laws of physics that do allow for a universe to suddenly appear from nothing.

So again that’s why I suggest you question , WHAT it is you are questioning?
More...

WHAT SPECIFIC PROVEN LAW(S) OF PHYSICS ALLOW FOR A UNIVERSE TO SPONTANEOUSLY APPEAR FROM THE VACUUM OF NOTHINGNESS?

Examples:
Newton's laws of motion
Boyle's Law
Charles's Law
Gay-Lussac's Law
Avogadro's Law
Zeroeth Law
Ohm's law
Kirchhoff’s laws
The Biot-Savart Law
Second Law of Thermodynamics
Dalton's Law
Dulong & Petit's Law
Faraday's Law
Graham's Law
Ideal Gas Law

Second Law of Engineering: If it isn't broken, don't fix it.
 
Quote from Lucrum:

No.
Definition of THEORY
1
: the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2
: abstract thought : speculation
3
: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art ...
5
: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>
6
a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption : conjecture c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject <theory of equations>

No, but then these are known and observable. I see and can feel the effects of gravity. NO ONE witnessed the big bang universe appearing out of nowhere.

Easy, once AGAIN I have not seen and you have not provided ANY laws of physics that do allow for a universe to suddenly appear from nothing.



WHAT SPECIFIC PROVEN LAW(S) OF PHYSICS ALLOW FOR A UNIVERSE TO SPONTANEOUSLY APPEAR FROM THE VACUUM OF NOTHINGNESS?

Examples:
Newton's laws of motion
Boyle's Law
Charles's Law
Gay-Lussac's Law
Avogadro's Law
Zeroeth Law
Ohm's law
Kirchhoff’s laws
The Biot-Savart Law
Second Law of Thermodynamics
Dalton's Law
Dulong & Petit's Law
Faraday's Law
Graham's Law
Ideal Gas Law

Second Law of Engineering: If it isn't broken, don't fix it.
More...



The religious adherents answer to that is, The Law of Pulling a Rabbit Out Of a Hat" whereas science doesn't believe it has the answer, for them its still at the level of theory.
 
Quote from omegapoint:

...whereas science doesn't believe it has the answer, for them its still at the level of theory.
More...
Which is all and exactly what I've been saying.


stewie is insisting the big bang theory is a proven, observable, verifiable scientific fact allowed for by some "law(s) of physics" he refuses to produce.
 
Quote from Lucrum:

Which is all and exactly what I've been saying.


stewie is insisting the big bang theory is a proven, observable, verifiable scientific fact allowed for by some "law(s) of physics" he refuses to produce.
More...

From the way I'm reading your exchanges, he's saying the laws of physics LEAD to the theory not that the Big Bang itself is a
law. The laws of physics are open ended as in even if there is
a god, he isn't a magician, the laws of physics would have to be revised and his doings explored. Unless rationality doesn't account for anything at all and we're just a random balloon flying
around.
 
Quote from omegapoint:

From the way I'm reading your exchanges, he's saying the laws of physics LEAD to the theory not that the Big Bang itself is a
law. The laws of physics are open ended as in even if there is
a god, he isn't a magician, the laws of physics would have to be revised and his doings explored. Unless rationality doesn't account for anything at all and we're just a random balloon flying
around.
More...
Actually my issue is mostly with him repeating over and over that the laws of physics allow for an entire universe to appear from NOTHING.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top