Jump to content

OT from Religions influence on Science


Handy andy

Recommended Posts

On ‎28‎/‎07‎/‎2017 at 7:34 AM, Strange said:

So, what have we learned?

  1. That Creationists attempt to affect education about science.
  2. Other religious forces attempt to affect the political decisions made on the basis of climate science.

There seems little other evidence of religions effect of science.

The OP seems to have abandoned his claims about religion and science. Presumably because they are unsupportable and he was just having a little rant about a theory he doesn't like.

Perhaps it is time to close this thread now it has degenerate into silly comments.

 

Apologies for not being a position to give you instant answers, due to poor internet coverage in my present location.

Peoples willingness to believe in a subject because others believe is how religious belief is spread to gullible people. Various posts on this forum by people who believe they are correct, cite the number of others who believe as proof they are correct in there belief. 

I cited to get things moving on the first post, the big bang theory as the origins of all matter in the universe, and Einsteins theories. Einsteins equations assume an empty space that has no substance, as promoted by many on this forum, like a religious person would promote a belief.

The concept of the graviton is a mathematical formulation that is not required in quantum foam theory.  Quantum foam theory does not assume a smooth space.

Quantum foam theory assumes space is full of virtual particles, without which space would not exist. It also does not require dark matter and explains how gravity works in a satisfactory way.

The concept of the big bang is based on a hypothetical mathematical model, and is not based on a known history of the universe, this theory is promoted on this forum as fact. There are other theories as to the origins of the universe, some not as believable as others, from creationism cited as science by some believers and a beginning of time in the big bang model cited by others. A universe from nothing does not require a big bang or a beginning of time, space can constantly come into and out of existence as quantum foam. All points in space are full of froth, much like what is talked about on this forum by some who claim to know that space is empty and is only coordinates. :)

Quantum matter comes into and out of existence in the lab, and at very low temperatures exists for longer according to new research in europe, and forms into short lived particles. Space is cold, no requirement for a super hot big bang exists.

As stated on a post above no evidence exists that matter is constantly being created in space, but space is expanding, and contracting according to quantum foam theory. space is therefore coming into existence and causing galaxies to move away from each other. 

Claiming someone is ignorant that does not believe what is preached is a common way less intelligent people on this forum try to force an argument. Whilst I find this amusing some might take offence. Another thread on trolling could be started on this topic which could be amusing. :)

Most people can create ideas at the drop of a hat, to explain things, using words, pictures or maths. If someone uses complex words or maths it is easy to confuse a less educated person and convince them BS is correct.

I do not believe Space is smooth as described by Einstein, and all matter did not spring into existence x billion years ago, with no matter ever coming into existence since. I currently think the concept of what space is misunderstood by most on this forum, in both the big bang theory and Einsteins theories. I also know there is misunderstanding or disagreement ref the mythical graviton, from reading various moderator posts.

Please refrain from mindless comments as it takes time to read. If you feel like being derogatory towards anyone with a different opinion, please don't bother joining in the thread.  I may not be able to respond for some time due to me having a crap internet connection and currently visiting an Island Paradise. :):)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Handy andy said:

I cited to get things moving on the first post, the big bang theory as the origins of all matter in the universe

That is not what the big bang theory says.

Quote

Einsteins equations assume an empty space that has no substance, as promoted by many on this forum, like a religious person would promote a belief.

Einstein's equations do not assume empty space. All useful solutions including matter or energy. (There are some solutions that are based on empty space but they, perhaps obviously, do not apply to the universe we live in!)

But discussing Einstein's equations and what they describe is not like a religious belief because it is based on EVIDENCE.

Quote

The concept of the graviton is a mathematical formulation that is not required in quantum foam theory.

Indeed. And there is no evidence for the graviton. I'm not sure what the relevance of this is.

Quote

 Quantum foam theory does not assume a smooth space.

What does this have to do with religious belief?

Quote

Quantum foam theory assumes space is full of virtual particles, without which space would not exist. It also does not require dark matter and explains how gravity works in a satisfactory way.

This is totally off topic now. 

If you want to discuss this, please start a thread in the Physics section. And be prepared to provide some support for these claims.

Quote

The concept of the big bang is based on a hypothetical mathematical model, and is not based on a known history of the universe, this theory is promoted on this forum as fact.

1. It is based on evidence first.

2. There is a mathematical model that makes predictions that match this evidence.

3. It is not promoted as a fact but as the best theory we currently have.

4. This still has nothing to do with religion.

Quote

There are other theories as to the origins of the universe, some not as believable as others, from creationism cited as science by some believers and a beginning of time in the big bang model cited by others.

Just because Creationists say it is science, doesn't mean it is. It is just another lie. But congratulations for finally bringing religion into the discussion. It has already been noted that Creationism is one of the few examples where people do attempt to undermine science and education for religious reasons.

But this really has no significant effect on the progress of science. Unless you can provide some evidence it does, instead of yet more incoherent and irrelevant rambling.

(And the big bang model doesn't say anything about creation or the beginning ion time.)

Quote

Claiming someone is ignorant that does not believe what is preached is a common way less intelligent people on this forum try to force an argument. 

The reason you are being told you are ignorant is because you keep saying things that are not true or are unsupported, not that you do not accept any particular theory.

But this has nothing to do with religion. Your little rant about religion is just you saying "I don't know why people accept these theories I don't like." Well, the reason they accept them is because of the evidence. The fact that you either don't know what that evidence is, or don't understand why it supports these theories, is just another example of your (wilful) ignorance. You could learn but you choose to stick to your (baseless) beliefs.

Quote

Most people can create ideas at the drop of a hat, to explain things, using words, pictures or maths. If someone uses complex words or maths it is easy to confuse a less educated person and convince them BS is correct.

Indeed. Anyone can come up with ideas. The challenge is then finding a way of testing the idea to see if the evidence supports it. The next challenge is being willing to abandon your favourite idea if the evidence doesn't support it, or accept another idea that the evidence does support.

Quote

I do not believe Space is smooth as described by Einstein ...

And here is the crux of the matter. On the one hand, we have people who accept scientific theories based on the evidence.

On the other, you reject science because you "believe" otherwise.

So, who is being religious?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The BB mathematical curve fit going back x billion years based on a few dots in time now is not science it is religious belief, just like the creatonists beliefs. You might as well turn around and believe in the fairies or unicorns, and trot along to confession with the rest of the catholic believers.

Edit: In a galaxy, stars are bound together: a large collection of stars orbiting a common centre of mass. After the theoretical Big Bang 14 billion years ago, the universe was filled with a uniform gas—no stars, no galaxies, the uniform gas concept does not need a big bang to produce it at an instant in time 14 billion years ago, it could be produced over an eternity very slowly.

Tiny perturbations in the gas created over an eternity, started to grow by force of gravity, eventually forming stars and galaxies. After galaxies formed, each had its own identity. Space is still expanding between galaxies, there is no obvious centre of a bang which all things are moving away from it is happening all the time around us. See links in Bang all the time thread I started for further info.

Quantum foam descriptions of how gravity works fits observations, appear logical, and do not need dark matter, or time dilation. You believe in an empty space full of nothing, and are therefore clearly wrong. Quantum matter exists in the lab it exists in space as quantum foam. You believe in dark matter, ie stuff that isn't observable but predicted by a mathematical equation that is most likely wrong.

You reject the concept of quantum foam because of your belief system in mathematical truth which loses credibility in singularities and dark matter.

Singularities in einsteins equations are mathematical nonsense which only a fool can believe. All matter appearing from a big bang and disappearing into nothing in a black hole are just insane and mathematical generated nonsense, not based on the real world.

Stupid results and conclusions, are normally rejected unless religious belief in a unsupportable truth is accepted, yours being the infallibility of a limited mathematical equation and a want to believe in none existing gravitons radiating away from matter creating a gravitational field.

If the maths doesn't fit the facts it is wrong.

Newtons equations fell due to errors. Einsteins ideas will go the same way, once the scientific world lose their religious belief system in mythical dark matter, and the infallibility of nonsense.

It is normal human nature to believe what you are told. You must be normal not strange. :)

I think you were correct in your previous post it is time to close this thread now, I am not going to believe in nonsense when I think there is amore believable theory already in existence. :)

Thankyou for the excellent input by the way :) But like I wrote some time ago space has substance, not just dimensions.

Edited by Handy andy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Handy andy said:

The BB mathematical curve fit going back x billion years based on a few dots in time now is not science it is religious belief, just like the creatonists beliefs. You might as well turn around and believe in the fairies or unicorns, and trot along to confession with the rest of the catholic believers.

Quantum foam descriptions of how gravity works fits observations, is logical, does not need dark matter, or time dilation. You believe in an empty space full of nothing, and are therefore clearly wrong. Quantum matter exists in the lab it exists in space as quantum foam. You believe in dark matter, ie stuff that isn't observable but predicted by a mathematical equation.

You reject the concept of quantum foam because of your belief system in mathematical truth which loses credibility in singularities and dark matter.

Singularities in einsteins equations are mathematical nonsense which only a fool can believe. All matter appearing from a big bang and disappearing into nothing in a black hole are just insane and mathematical generated nonsense, not based on the real world.

Stupid results and conclusions, are normally rejected unless religious belief in a unsupportable truth is accepted, yours being the infallibility of a limited mathematical equation and a want to believe in none existing gravitons.

If the maths doesn't fit the facts or are unbelievable they are wrong.

Newtons equations fell due to errors. Einsteins ideas will go the same way, once the scientific world lose their religious belief system in mythical dark matter.

It is normal human nature to believe what you are told. You must be normal not strange. :)

I think you were correct in your previous post it is time to close this thread now.

Just goes to show, you don't need a god to blindly believe nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Just goes to show, you don't need a god to blindly believe nonsense.

My point exactly. Blind belief in something that is not logical is religion.

You claim to be a scientist what do you know of quantum entanglement and how it works in space :) 

https://phys.org/news/2017-07-probability-quantum-world-local-realism.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=daily-nwletter

 

Edited by Handy andy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Handy andy said:

My point exactly. Blind belief in something that is not logical is religion.

 

Then you've missed my point.

6 minutes ago, Handy andy said:

You claim to be a scientist

 

I've never claimed or pretended to be a scientist, I'm just an interested amateur.

Quote

what do you know of quantum entanglement and how it works in space :)

Not a lot, but I know enough to know you don't either.;)

Edited by dimreepr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Then you've missed my point.

I've never claimed or pretended to be a scientist, I'm just an interested amateur, but I know enough to know you don't either.

I twisted your words to make my point. I missed nothing. :) at least I don't think so. :(

There are a lot of interested amateurs in the world, I just cant help questioning and looking for more believable theories. Quantum foam being a good candidate for gravity something I am interested in. It also satisfies my curiosity in that direction. I slipped over to the big bang because it could just as easily be happening all the time continuously according to other theories, Matter appearing very slowly via quantum fluctuations in the cold of space over an eternity is more logical to me than it all appeared x billion years ago in a big bang or 6000 years ago according to creationists.

Asking questions around the edge of what is known helps to find out what is believable and what isn't. Some people for instance on the forum don't all agree on some aspects of the graviton, indicating we are all learning.

Mordred did an excellent thread on what space is, he is very good at maths, but he believes in the big bang. I don't, He is a clever guy but having read a good number of the links he gave me, I found myself disbelieving in the BB. The concept off all matter appearing at once is a mathematical convenience.

I used to be very good at sums and could concoct curve fits and mathematical algorithms for all manner of things the accuracy of which improved with more points to make the curves go through. The big bang takes known facts and measurements in the hear and now and then extrapolates back a few billion years and goes hey presto a beginning of time and all matter. This is highly dodgy conclusion to believe in, a similar result is obtained via a slow accumulation of matter out of an expanding space. I find the latter more believable.

As for the god concept many people on this forum don't believe in a god and like most religious people cant define what that god would be, in science the god particle would be what all things are made off. Quantum foam may well be what all matter evolves from. etc etc. Whether we believe in Big Bangers or not is our business.

Some people are affected by oppositional defiance disorder, and don't believe what they are told to believe, unless it makes sense. If it sounds, smells, tastes, and feels like BS then it is BS as may be everything on this thread. I guess you have already made your mind up. For me I like quantum foam and am going to carry on reading up on this, I also like a continual bang rather than a one off event so I will carry on reading this. Space is not an empty vacuum it is full of quantum stuff and is continually evolving, that quantum stuff could just as easily be described as another version of the ether to annoy the moderators, who are not in all cases as knowledgeable as they would have us all believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Handy andy said:

The BB mathematical curve fit going back x billion years based on a few dots in time now is not science it is religious belief, just like the creatonists beliefs.

There are many, many thousands of "dots" that make up the red-shift data. I don't know how you can just dismiss that.

There are also many other lines of evidence that are consistent with the theory. 

Then there is all the indirect evidence (for example, the fact that GR is extremely well-tested and appears to be correct).

On the one hand we have an overwhelming amount of evidence and on the other we have your beliefs. So, again, who is being "religious"? It looks like it's you.

Quote

Quantum foam descriptions of how gravity works fits observations, appear logical, and do not need dark matter, or time dilation. You believe in an empty space full of nothing, and are therefore clearly wrong. Quantum matter exists in the lab it exists in space as quantum foam. You believe in dark matter, ie stuff that isn't observable but predicted by a mathematical equation that is most likely wrong.

You keep saying this but have provided zero evidence. As such, I see no reason to believe you. After all, the only reason for believing someone with no evidence is ... religion. I am not joining your church.

Quote

You reject the concept of quantum foam because of your belief system in mathematical truth which loses credibility in singularities and dark matter.

I reject your claims about it because you have given no reason to accept them. No theory. No evidence. Nothing. Just empty claims about what you believe. I see no reason to accept your religious beliefs.

Quote

If the maths doesn't fit the facts it is wrong

And, in the case of GR, the math does fit the facts.

Your religious beliefs might or might not fit the facts but we can't tell because all you have is some vague claims and math.

Quote

Newtons equations fell due to errors. Einsteins ideas will go the same way, once the scientific world lose their religious belief system in mythical dark matter, and the infallibility of nonsense.

Newton's equations still work and are still used.

Einstein's equations will be superseded when someone comes up with a better model. Your religious beliefs do not constitute a better model.

Quote

But like I wrote some time ago space has substance, not just dimensions.

You are, of course, entitled to your religious beliefs but the rest of us will stick with the science, thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.