Leaderboard

So you've robbed both faith and trust of their individual meanings, in order to be able to say you have faith in science. You steal from your own intellect. Pay attention, please.

Thanks! There are several issues already adressed by other members so I focus on this specific part of the discussion for now: That means that for instance the Mars rovers sent by Nasa becomes "marsly"? The rovers and hence the rovers' instruments* are transformed by some unknown process so that they are different on a fundamental level? And yet the rover** instruments are able to deliver reliable results. I do not find the hypothesis plausible. Can you provide som details why it is worth investigating? *) https://mars.nasa.gov/msl/mission/instruments/ **) and all other space probes on, or in orbit around or on their way to or away from celestial bodies in the solar system.

The way I see it, if God can do anything, even perform acts that are outside the laws of the physical universe He may even have created, it destroys most chances of meaningful scientific discussion about Him. If, however, God merely has a complete knowledge of the universe and operates within its laws, then we can actually have a decent dialogue that's not destined to end with, "Well, He's all-powerful, sooooo...." God still doesn't seem to desire direct observation, but with omnipotence removed He is less supernatural. What if He has been working with the Laws of Everything (all interactions unified with gravity and completely understood) for billions of years (with the current universe, at least)? Is a God like this any more believable? Any less worthy?

! Moderator Note Please review and adhere to the speculations guidelines. This level of rigor won’t cut it. https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/86720-guidelines-for-participating-in-speculations-discussions/

Give us an example. I can't imagine one.

Faith is belief without evidence. Are you sure you have "faith" in our scientific methodology, or is it possibly "trust/confidence" based on actually seeing its success?

Faith is trust backwards, whilst everything moves forwards. But that doesn't mean we should be down on the faithful because we trust the future...

! Moderator Note Conjurer, I'll repeat what I said in the soapboxing warning I just gave you. You have a poor grasp of the subject matter you're arguing about, and you make it worse by refusing to support yourself or engage with those trying to help through discussion. Please be more rigorous in your arguments here. This stinker is closed.

Nowadays more and more scientist create profiles at various databases/search engines. Think about: Google Scholar profile (once active and public you simple click on the underlined name and you get a complete list of publications, at least those present in Google Scholar). ORCID ID is a non-proprietary alphanumeric code that uniquely identify scientific contributions to the appropriate author (nowadays more and a prerequisite when submitting a manuscript to a journal). Researchgate profile. A large number of scientist upload there work here and make it accessible to either the members (by request) or public (this service is often used to present other than official papers as well such as conference posters, preprints, data, methods etc.). I am afraid that this will only count for currently still active researchers. If you want to get a full overview of let’s say Albert Einstein than this is easy but a less famous person will require a lot of effort by searching the web, asking former co-workers, reading some of the work you can find and look for self-citations linking to work you didn’t find earlier and so on.

You’ve been resisting learning thus far. Tenaciously.

It's not about transparency, it's about the light from stars being dim and being washed-out by daylight. Your eyes can't cope with bright light from your surroundings, and see the stars. Same reason photos taken on the Moon generally don't show stars - even though there's practically no atmosphere there. A satellite camera will be arranged so that direct sunlight doesn't cause the same issue. There's no reason for simple air to be one-way transparent. edit: at night, where do you think the atmosphere goes to make stars visible?

It's exactly the opposite - Faith is that the unknown has supernatural answers which have nothing to do with nature, it is science which offers nature aligned answers. Literally nothing can be answered unambiguously through faith. Faith in the religious sense is religious belief which by definition is trust in a particular system of belief. Thats it.

Our understanding is currently incomplete, we have no complete TOE yet, but we're certain that the Laws of Thermodynamics can't be broken. Omnipotence suggests that God could circumvent those laws by a mere act of will. I'm suggesting that perhaps the whole concept of omnipotence is misunderstood. Early man, with a limited understanding of the laws, might have considered space-faring aliens omnipotent, so perhaps God does exist but works within the laws as He understands them, and we're simply calling it omnipotence.

Dim would you shut up for a while please? I read the last 2 pages of this thread and youre not making any sense, literally your every post is some kind of a manouvre with multiple meanings to cover up what you don’t know or what you don’t want to say.

I see where you're coming from in that, my thought was more along the lines of "in excess" of known Laws. Rather than the "superior position", simply "beyond". Sort of a "beyond the horizon" type image. From Wikianswers: A prefix signifying above, over, beyond, and hence often denoting in a superior position, in excess, over and above, in addition, exceedingly; as in superimpose, supersede, supernatural, superabundance. Which is why I agreed with ydoap before. To me, "Supernatural" and "Paranormal" are virtually equal in meaning. But my upbringing differs from yours and gives me a different meaning for "Supernatural". We don't know what it is. We don't know the Laws it follows. We don't know whether or not there is more than one type of DM. We don't know whether or not they interact with each other in some way. We can barely see the tip of the tail and we can decide whether it is a squirrel or a tiger, when we've never seen either? Aside from anthropomorphic superiority, is there any real evidence that it doesn't interact? Only our type of matter interacts with itself? Ours is "special"? Isn't that handy? I honestly don't think that we know enough to be making assertions about how any of the (possibly) various forms of DM interact with each other. As we learn more, we will be in a better potition to rule things in or out.

hello my advice also for you do not write grow up and learn algebra first you understand o.k and we use dear for as a respect not for affection .very well said i am insulting what you and others doing you are not aware of it wonder full .

It is only because I actually science.

, or failur. Faith is in the firmly believed Future.

Faith.

"Blessed is he who believes". Do not substitute physics for mathematics. Any matter has some limiting resource, which we call "energy" (or "mass"). Therefore, if matter creates a gravitational field, then it cannot be infinite. I am sure that you make a mistake by comparing gravity with electromagnetic waves (or light), since we can screen electromagnetic waves, but gravity cannot. For example, according to the theory that I develop, the gravitational fields of the big planets of the Solar system reach the Sun. Therefore, the orbits of these planets are close to a circle. But the gravitational fields of small objects of the Solar system (asteroids, plutoids, and also Mercury) do not reach the Sun. Therefore, their orbits have large eccentricities. I derived the exact formula for calculating the radius of the gravitational action of any planet, but I would not want to publish it, since it has not yet passed the test of time, in my understanding.

If you wanted to look into it into further detail, I would recommend that you study quantum eraser experiments. I believe particle precognition is the underlying reason of why these quantum mechanical experiments defy common sense. They may have some mention about it.