Why Some Scientists Embrace the 'Multiverse
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
tut tut sockpuppet, methinks you project too much.
You keep "giving it" too many times but can't make a coherent argument from it once.
Even if one postulates a universe that is fine tuned, it is overcome with postulating eternal inflation according what you call "our" scientific reality as Hawking states.
Even at this level, so called fine-tuning is rendered unecessary.
In any case fine tuned by what..Stephen Hawking "our scientific reality" states categorically its all down to gravity.
ya dope
Quote from jem:
this is consistent with my research on the commandment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou_shalt_not_kill
You shall not murder sometimes translated as You shall not kill, KJV Thou shalt not kill (LXX οὐ φονεύσεις, translating Hebrew לֹא תִּרְצָח lo tirṣaḥ, is a moral imperative included as one of the Ten Commandments in the Torah,[1] specifically Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17.
The imperative is against unlawful killing resulting in bloodguilt. The Hebrew Bible contains numerous prohibitions against unlawful killing, but also allows for justified killing in the context of warfare, capital punishment, and self-defense.
Contents [hide]
1 Hebrew Bible
1.1 Retzach
1.2 Justified killing: due consequence for crime
1.3 Justified killing: in warfare
1.4 Justified killing: intruder in the home
2 Jewish interpretation
3 New Testament view
4 Roman Catholic Church
4.1 Modern Catechism
5 Reformation and Post-Reformation views
6 See also
7 Notes
8 Further reading
9 External links
Hebrew Bible[edit]
Retzach[edit]
The Hebrew verb רצח (r-ṣ-ḥ, also transliterated retzach, ratzákh, ratsakh etc.) has a wider range of meanings, generally describing destructive activity, including meanings "to break, to dash to pieces" as well as "to slay, kill, murder".
According to the Priestly Code of the Book of Numbers, killing anyone outside the context of war with a weapon, or in unarmed combat, is considered retzach,[2] even if the killing is accidental.[3] The Bible never uses the word retzach in conjunction with war.[4][5]
The act of slaying itself, regardless of questions of bloodguilt, is expressed with the verb n-k-h "to strike, smite, hit, beat, slay, kill". This verb is used of both an Egyptian slaying an Israelite slave and of Moses slaying the Egyptian in retaliation in Exodus 2:11-12. The Covenant Code and Holiness Code both prescribe the death penalty for people that commit n-k-h.[6][7]
Another verb meaning "to kill, slay, murder, destroy, ruin" is h-r-g, used of Cain slaying Abel in Genesis 4:8. When Cain is driven into exile, complaining that "every one that findeth me shall slay me" in Genesis 4:14, he uses the same verb.
The commandment against murder can be viewed as a legal issue governing human relationships, noting that the first five commandments relate strongly to man's duty to God and that the latter five commandments describe duties toward humans.[8][9] The commandment against murder can also be viewed as based in respect for God himself.[10][11] Since man is made in God's image, the shedding of innocent blood is viewed as a direct offense against the Creator.[12]
The Christian Bible full of contradictions. This is consistent with and evidence that it is a work of man and NOT the word of a God, as claimed by Christians, and most of those who call themselves Christian.
we agree... on something...
Todays bottom up approach... requires one to postulate an initial state of the universe that is carefully fine-tuned (which is the model of physics which is consistent with the standard model - it is our current reality) however if you are not satisfied with that.... you can speculate that we have eternal inflation... or you can speculate we have almost infinite universes and then if you dream up the top down approach you can say gravity shaped our universe.
you see stu... you understand the science you are just too much of a troll to tell the truth.
Todays bottom up approach... requires one to postulate an initial state of the universe that is carefully fine-tuned (which is the model of physics which is consistent with the standard model - it is our current reality) however if you are not satisfied with that.... you can speculate that we have eternal inflation... or you can speculate we have almost infinite universes and then if you dream up the top down approach you can say gravity shaped our universe.
you see stu... you understand the science you are just too much of a troll to tell the truth.
Quote from stu:
tut tut sockpuppet, methinks you project too much.
You keep "giving it" too many times but can't make a coherent argument from it once.
Even if one postulates a universe that is fine tuned, it is overcome with postulating eternal inflation according what you call "our" scientific reality as Hawking states.
Even at this level, so called fine-tuning is rendered unecessary.
In any case fine tuned by what..Stephen Hawking "our scientific reality" states categorically its all down to gravity.
ya dope
my argument is that many of the worlds top scientists state the universe appears fine tuned and they produce the science to explain it.
only a troll would dispute that statement as I have produced dozens of scientists and papers or videos explaining it.
In fact it becomes crystal clear to anyone studying our universe our constants are amazingly fine tuned.
for instance if dark energy (the cosmological constant) were any weaker are stronger the universe would crunch or fly apart. to 120th decimal place..
just a tiny change at the 120th decimal place and the universe does not work.
Now that is a very fine tuning is it not?
How do you explain it.
1. a tuner
2. almost infinite universes
3. faith that someday we will find a new answer which answers this question and the question of all the other fine tunings.
that is what susskind says in the video... (he also discusses luck but discounts it.) that is what dozens of other top scientists say as well in books, in quotes, in video.