Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all, we have some important news to share. Please follow the link here to find out more!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058419143/important-news/p1?new=1

Artificial Life Created

1…1415171920…23

Comments

  • #482
    StealthRolex
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭StealthRolex


    Wicknight wrote: »
    Leaving aside that science has answers for a lot of those things, how is simply picking a religious answer without any way to determine if it is true or not actually increasing our understanding?

    because science and theology or theology and science are complementary. One cannot exist without the other. The represent the two sides to humanity, the temporal and the spiritual. What we can see and what we cannot see, the visible and the invisible.


  • #483
    StealthRolex
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭StealthRolex


    Wicknight wrote: »
    No, it is that you didn't understand what you quoted (no offense :pac:)

    The particles that appear in the void are not placed into it. The void is empty, but these particles appear at random, so you can't actually say an empty void is actually empty because even if you take everything out of it (ie it is nothing) particles will randomly appear and it will not be empty.

    In this universe there is no such thing as nothing. It is a human concept. Nothing will always contain something because nothing produces something.

    If you are thinking this is weird and doesn't make sense, you are correct. Welcome to the world of quantum mechanics.

    There is nothing difficult about it. Take for example a d orbital. if you look at one tiny tiny tiny part of it could appear empty, a void, containing nothing. Look at it again and it may contain a particle. Did this particle appear from nothing? No it appeared from another part of the orbital but moves so quickly it is hard to tell if it is there or not, if it is a partial or a wave or not. It is something and it came from somewhere.

    Take any quantum snap shot if time and a space can appear to be empty and at that particular time it might be. Then again it might not. It all depends on the quantum. A quantum the size of a universe will contain something. A quantum smaller than a particle may contain nothing.

    Moving up to the mass of the universe, how do you explain it all coming from nothing?


  • #484
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    On a side note Stealthrolex, I got some very nice presents this Christmas and gorged myself on eggs at Easter so you might want to update your sig.


  • #485
    StealthRolex
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭StealthRolex


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    On a side note Stealthrolex, I got some very nice presents this Christmas and gorged myself on eggs at Easter so you might want to update your sig.

    Someone took pity on you. That's nice :)


  • #486
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    StealthRolex wrote: »
    Someone took pity on you. That's nice :)

    Yeah that's what happened alright. It's only pity that allows me to celebrate formerly pagan festivals that christians decided to make their own festivals coincide with by exchanging gifts, eating, drinking and being merry. Otherwise those activities would be totally off the table due to my lack of belief in the stories in a book.


  • Advertisement
  • #487
    Nick Dolan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 199 ✭✭Nick Dolan


    Jakkass wrote: »
    This isn't entirely accurate Nick.

    Church Fathers such as Augustine, and Origen of Jerusalem had offered alternative interpretations of Genesis from the 3rd century AD. It isn't true that only 1 view of the Genesis creation account existed until Darwin came along. It might suit your view down to the ground, but it simply isn't the truth.



    They may have different views but if they relied on evidence gleamed from revelatory sources, they cannot be described as scientific views .Reliance on revealed information, central to organised religions of all kinds does not encourage scientific progress.


  • #488
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    StealthRolex wrote: »
    because science and theology or theology and science are complementary. One cannot exist without the other. The represent the two sides to humanity, the temporal and the spiritual. What we can see and what we cannot see, the visible and the invisible.

    Ok, but that doesn't answer my question.

    How does it increase our understanding?

    Would you agree that thinking you know something that is actually wrong is of equal (if not less) understanding as simply not knowing it in the first place?


  • #489
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    StealthRolex wrote: »
    There is nothing difficult about it. Take for example a d orbital. if you look at one tiny tiny tiny part of it could appear empty, a void, containing nothing. Look at it again and it may contain a particle. Did this particle appear from nothing? No it appeared from another part of the orbital but moves so quickly it is hard to tell if it is there or not, if it is a partial or a wave or not. It is something and it came from somewhere.

    Well that isn't actually what happens, but also that isn't relevant to zero point energy.

    These particles are not moving in from some where else.
    StealthRolex wrote: »
    Moving up to the mass of the universe, how do you explain it all coming from nothing?

    I don't.

    I'm merely pointing out the flaw in your assertion that nothing can come from nothing.


  • #490
    StealthRolex
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭StealthRolex


    Wicknight wrote: »
    I'm merely pointing out the flaw in your assertion that nothing can come from nothing.


    But it is not empty and therefore not nothing. It contains energy which is something.


  • #491
    StealthRolex
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭StealthRolex


    Wicknight wrote: »
    How does it increase our understanding?

    You're not very quick at this - is it too subtle?

    Science increases our understand of the visible, or what we can make visible using for example telescopes, microscopes or colliders.

    Theology increases our understand of what we can never make visible. God, soul, faith, for example.


  • Advertisement
  • #492
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    StealthRolex wrote: »
    But it is not empty and therefore not nothing. It contains energy which is something.

    No it doesn't, the field is zero which is the same as nothing.


  • #493
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    StealthRolex wrote: »
    Theology increases our understand of what we can never make visible. God, soul, faith, for example.

    How? How does it increase our understanding?

    Again do you agree, as I asked already, that think you know something that is in fact not true is the same level of understanding as not knowing something at all?

    Who understands "the invisible" better, you our the Hindus?


  • #494
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    On a side note Stealthrolex, I got some very nice presents this Christmas and gorged myself on eggs at Easter so you might want to update your sig.

    Yup and while you are at it all the decent values they also accepted as a gift from Christianity when atheistic regimes slaughtered hundreds of millions.


  • #495
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    ISAW wrote: »
    Yup and while you are at it all the decent values they also accepted as a gift from Christianity when atheistic regimes slaughtered hundreds of millions.

    Stop that right now. This is not After Hours.


  • #496
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    Wicknight wrote: »

    How many planets are in the universe?

    Terrestrial or Gas giants?

    Bit if the " would that be a European swallow" nudge nudge wink wink say no more there eh?


  • #497
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    ISAW wrote: »
    Yup and while you are at it all the decent values they also accepted as a gift from Christianity when atheistic communist dictatorship regimes slaughtered hundreds of millions.

    To the vast majority of people on the planet they're communist dictatorships run by megalomaniacs. To christians with a bone to pick to non-believers they're atheist regimes. My ideal society is nothing like those communist dictatorships, it's one very much like the one we have, where people are free to practice their religion if they so choose as long as I'm free not to. A secular "regime" with all the freedoms that brings, both freedom of religion and freedom from religion

    Also, you talk about accepting decent values as a "gift from Christianity" but from where I'm standing these values are common to all human beings. If history showed that societies that were never exposed to christianity for whatever reason had no idea that enjoying a nice cool drink in the sun is in any way different to slaughtering your family for sh!ts and giggles you might have a point but history of course does not show that. It shows that religions and value systems all over the world that developed independently of christianity all tend to have similar ethical values. Not exactly the same but things like "thou shalt not kill" feature pretty highly.


    and to preempt the question of the source of these values: the societies in which they lived and the evolved impulses in their brains


  • #498
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    Wicknight wrote: »

    In this universe there is no such thing as nothing. It is a human concept.

    One can contend humans cant conceive a "nothing"!

    But let us say there is such a concept and accept what you seem to be stating.

    Given there is a concept of nothing but no such thing in the real universe which can be proved to exist in the Universe then you accept the existence of things which can't be shown to be true! A bit like God eh?
    If you are thinking this is weird and doesn't make sense, you are correct. Welcome to the world of quantum mechanics.

    Pair production from the "quantum vacuum" does not appear out of "nothing" it is a consequence of mass energy conversion.
    Vacuum energy is an underlying background energy that exists in space even when devoid of matter.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy


  • #499
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    StealthRolex wrote: »
    Why can't something other that a god just exist and we call it God?

    Why call it a god if it's not a god?


  • #500
    StealthRolex
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭StealthRolex


    Wicknight wrote: »
    No it doesn't, the field is zero which is the same as nothing.

    That is going beyond stretching the truth. The value is non-zero.


  • #501
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    To the vast majority of people on the planet they're communist dictatorships run by megalomaniacs.
    My mistake

    Reply was off topic and is move to this thread on atheistic regimes:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=66073762&postcount=649


  • Advertisement
  • #502
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Why call it a god if it's not a god?

    If it is something that caused life to exist and isn't measurable what would you call it?


  • #503
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    ISAW wrote: »
    That as well but communism does not have to be atheistic.



    i.e. the modern democracies heavily influenced by Religion and Christianity and not the atheistic hell holes that tried to remove and suppress those religions with Godless regimes
    promoting atheism all of which didn't last and contributed widespread death to the world.



    Which the Church is happy to support and work with but our atheistic comrades want to remove all vestiges of the Church from society.



    REally? what Godless regimes had decent values and didnt slaughter tens or hundreds of millions?




    Godless China slaughtered hundreds of millions before they heard about Christianity. history!
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history#Chinese_dynasties
    historian Peter Perdue has shown that the decimation of the Dzungars was the result of an explicit policy of extermination launched by the Qianlong emperor.[95] Although this "deliberate use of massacre" has been largely ignored by modern scholars,[96] Perdue has called it an "ethnic genocide" and argued that it brought a "final solution" to China's problems on its northwest frontier for one century.[94] Mark Levene, a historian who specializes in the study of genocide,[57] has stated that the extermination of the Dzungars was "arguably the eighteenth century genocide par excellence."[97]

    Then there is the tanguts 1252 19 millions killed by china.
    http://www.mega.nu/ampp/rummel/sod.tab2.1b.gif line 455

    Mongols 14th and 15th century -30 million dead - non christian!

    http://www.mega.nu/ampp/rummel/sod.chap2.htm
    For just those historical democide estimates I have been able to find or make here, pre-20th century democide has been around 16 to 17 times more lethal than war.



    Yet godless china got through 100 million dead before the 20 Century and godless Japan 1570-1638 slaughtered (http://www.mega.nu/ampp/rummel/sod.tab2.1b.gif lines 428 to 433) 1.5 million including 238,000 Christians.

    Four short periods in ancient china 221BC 220AD 618AD and 1626-55
    Total losses for these four ~(not due to Christianity in China) 123 Million! - line 242



    What christian regime ordered the deaths of numbers like these godless regimes?

    Let's not have two threads of that stuff. Please confine it to the other one or I lock them both.


  • #504
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    ISAW wrote: »
    One can contend humans cant conceive a "nothing"!

    But let us say there is such a concept and accept what you seem to be stating.

    Given there is a concept of nothing but no such thing in the real universe which can be proved to exist in the Universe then you accept the existence of things which can't be shown to be true! A bit like God eh?

    What?

    Who said anything about proving anything.
    ISAW wrote: »
    Pair production from the "quantum vacuum" does not appear out of "nothing" it is a consequence of mass energy conversion.
    Vacuum energy is an underlying background energy that exists in space even when devoid of matter.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy

    Yes but the background energy comes from nothing.

    http://www.scientificexploration.org/talks/28th_annual/28th_annual_moddel_vacuum_energy_extraction.html

    The "little bursts of energy" don't come from anything, they come from nothing. As the professor says these little blips of energy have no source, they literally come from nothing.


  • #505
    Nick Dolan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 199 ✭✭Nick Dolan


    ISAW wrote: »
    If it is something that caused life to exist and isn't measurable what would you call it?


    This is just "God did it" over and over again. And science has shown over and over that God doesnt have to do it. We dont have to do rain dances, sacrifices, prayers or believe in supernatural creation.


  • #506
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    PDN wrote: »
    Let's not have two threads of that stuff. Please confine it to the other one or I lock them both.

    Which thread is that?


  • #507
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    StealthRolex wrote: »
    That is going beyond stretching the truth. The value is non-zero.

    No it isn't, the energy blips into existence (ie the field moves from zero to something) and then blips out of existence.


  • #508
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    ISAW wrote: »
    If it is something that caused life to exist and isn't measurable what would you call it?

    I would call it "something" until I had some idea of what this something is. The word god carries different connotations for every single person alive. For some it's an undefined energy, for some it's an uncaused cause, for some there are many gods, for some just one, for some their gods have many arms and elephant's trunks, for some their god appeared in Israel 2000 years ago, for some their god disapproves of homosexuality etc etc etc etc etc. And that's before I even get into the myriad different visions people have of god even though they claim to believe in the same one. If I actually gave every different understanding there is of the word god it would probably take the rest of my life.

    For you personally I would assume that the word god means:
    An intelligent being
    A being that exists in a realm outside our universe
    A being that has always existed
    The creator of matter and energy
    The creator and designer of life and the cosmos
    The giver of souls (only to humans)
    The inspiration behind the bible (but not any of the other holy books)
    A man who lived in Israel 2000 years ago about which many extraordinary claims are made
    The source of all morality and of all good
    The punisher of sins and of lack of belief
    The performer of miracles
    The answerer of prayers (but, presumably, only those of christians)
    The provider of eternal bliss for those who he considers deserving
    Well you get the idea

    And attaching all of these connotations to something merely because it has the characteristic "caused life to exist and isn't measurable" is a bit silly don't you think? Imagine if we went on to find out that it was some kind of unintelligent natural process that didn't actually do any of the things that anybody associates with the word god other than "caused life to exist". wouldn't our faces be red, having called a chemical reaction in a pool of goo god!


  • #509
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    Nick Dolan wrote: »
    If he had fully accepted the creationist version of life, he would not have formed a theory of evolution. No what if.

    You are conflating Biblical fundamentalism and creationism with mainstream Christianity!
    Please read the charter!


  • #510
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    Wicknight wrote: »
    No it doesn't, the field is zero which is the same as nothing.

    So in a zero point field there is no energy?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_state

    According to present-day understanding of what is called the vacuum state or the quantum vacuum, it is "by no means a simple empty space",[1] and again: "it is a mistake to think of any physical vacuum as some absolutely empty void."[2]


  • Advertisement
  • #511
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    PDN wrote: »
    Let's not have two threads of that stuff. Please confine it to the other one or I lock them both.

    sorry im losing track of myself because Im posting in both.
    I have earlier deleted some stuff because i didnt realise this and was posting it in the wrong thread.
    As PDN suggested please refer to the other thread on Stalin Mao Pol pot etc.


Advertisement