About Belief, Religion and God

[ephrem]

…pat:

Well we can’t know that two people looking at the same object actually see it as the same thing. They may call it the same thing, because in prior observations they assign word “X” to this widget, but the two people may see entirely different things, so if you were able to jump into that person’s body this ‘widget’ may them look totally different to you. Or say when you see red and you jump into the other person’s body, and observe the same thing it then appears blue, but that’s what that person see’s as red.

…i don’t think that is true but for details or minor differences. We might see shades of color differently, but entire objects? There is a base-line of similarity in perception that extends to all of us, otherwise we’d have run in to difficulties fast…

Somebody asked one of the quantum physicists once where did the laws of physics come from. Not who discovered them but where they actually came from. Nobody knows.

…selfregulation of immense systems where order follows chaos. But you’re right, we don’t know, except by believing the opposite we fool ourselves that we do know…

No, even high as a kite, I always have thought. Of course, being aware that you are not having a thought, is in fact a thought

…i define thought/thinking as the inner monologue that interprets reality. When that’s absent, there’s clear awareness. How do you define thought?

[pat]

Hey Ephrem, Check this outâ?¦.
So I took the initiative to ask Dr. Lawrence Krauss about “Null Theory” or the something from nothing theory.
Here is the email I sent him:

[i] Dear Dr. Kruass,
Quantum theory states that out of a void something appears. I have run into a problem where I have looked and looked for a description or definition of null theory where there is truly a void, an absolute nothingness. When I speak of nothingness I mean the philosophical definition of complete and total absence of anything physical, metaphysical or otherwise. Every where I look, everything I read first describes a void, but then populates it with an “energy” or dark energy, or subatomic particles popping in and out of existence, “branes” or what not. I have a problem with this. In this nothingness I have heard a bunch of quantum theorists in turn describe a bunch of something’s in the same breath.
So it begs the question, is there such thing as true void? Is there a state that is stateless and posses no properties what so ever? If so, can absolute nothingness, with nothing interacting with it, beget anything?

I know you are an expert in the field so I figured I’d present my philosophical dilemma at your feet to see if you may have an answer.
Thank you very much, I hope I did not eat up to much of your time.
Regards,[/i]

Quite frankly I did not think he’d respond because he doesn’t know who the hell I am, but he did and here is his response:
[i] short answer: no… the vacuum in quantum theory is alas, full of virtual particles.

Lawrence M. Krauss
Foundation Professor
Director, Origins Initiative
Co-Director, Cosmology Initiative
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY [/i]

Well, that answers that. Something from nothing is still actually something from something. I wonder if he would have answered if he knew my motive?

[pat]

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…pat:

Well we can’t know that two people looking at the same object actually see it as the same thing. They may call it the same thing, because in prior observations they assign word “X” to this widget, but the two people may see entirely different things, so if you were able to jump into that person’s body this ‘widget’ may them look totally different to you. Or say when you see red and you jump into the other person’s body, and observe the same thing it then appears blue, but that’s what that person see’s as red.

…i don’t think that is true but for details or minor differences. We might see shades of color differently, but entire objects? There is a base-line of similarity in perception that extends to all of us, otherwise we’d have run in to difficulties fast… [/quote]
You are probably right but A) there is no way to know and B) even minor differences in perception can turn in to huge errors in empirical science. If you try to shoot the moon with a laser beam and you are off by one millimeter, you’ll miss it by kilometers.

Somebody asked one of the quantum physicists once where did the laws of physics come from. Not who discovered them but where they actually came from. Nobody knows.

…selfregulation of immense systems where order follows chaos. But you’re right, we don’t know, except by believing the opposite we fool ourselves that we do know…

No, even high as a kite, I always have thought. Of course, being aware that you are not having a thought, is in fact a thought

…i define thought/thinking as the inner monologue that interprets reality. When that’s absent, there’s clear awareness. How do you define thought? [/quote]

Any mental form or process.

[ephrem]

[quote]pat wrote:
Hey Ephrem, Check this outâ?¦.
So I took the initiative to ask Dr. Lawrence Krauss about “Null Theory” or the something from nothing theory.
Here is the email I sent him:

[i] Dear Dr. Kruass,
Quantum theory states that out of a void something appears. I have run into a problem where I have looked and looked for a description or definition of null theory where there is truly a void, an absolute nothingness. When I speak of nothingness I mean the philosophical definition of complete and total absence of anything physical, metaphysical or otherwise. Every where I look, everything I read first describes a void, but then populates it with an “energy” or dark energy, or subatomic particles popping in and out of existence, “branes” or what not. I have a problem with this. In this nothingness I have heard a bunch of quantum theorists in turn describe a bunch of something’s in the same breath.
So it begs the question, is there such thing as true void? Is there a state that is stateless and posses no properties what so ever? If so, can absolute nothingness, with nothing interacting with it, beget anything?

I know you are an expert in the field so I figured I’d present my philosophical dilemma at your feet to see if you may have an answer.
Thank you very much, I hope I did not eat up to much of your time.
Regards,[/i]

Quite frankly I did not think he’d respond because he doesn’t know who the hell I am, but he did and here is his response:
[i] short answer: no… the vacuum in quantum theory is alas, full of virtual particles.

Lawrence M. Krauss
Foundation Professor
Director, Origins Initiative
Co-Director, Cosmology Initiative
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY [/i]

Well, that answers that. Something from nothing is still actually something from something. I wonder if he would have answered if he knew my motive?
[/quote]

…very interesting, and unavoidable. Once i wondered what the universe would look like if you’d be able to look back at it from nothingness. I assumed this complete void of anything is what the universe expands in, and realised that you’d see nothing. From the viewpoint of nothingness, nothing ever happened; we, and the universe don’t exist…

[ephrem]

[quote]…i define thought/thinking as the inner monologue that interprets reality. When that’s absent, there’s clear awareness. How do you define thought?

Any mental form or process. [/quote]

…too broad a definition for my taste…

[pat]

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Hey Ephrem, Check this out�¢?�¦.
So I took the initiative to ask Dr. Lawrence Krauss about “Null Theory” or the something from nothing theory.
Here is the email I sent him:

[i] Dear Dr. Kruass,
Quantum theory states that out of a void something appears. I have run into a problem where I have looked and looked for a description or definition of null theory where there is truly a void, an absolute nothingness. When I speak of nothingness I mean the philosophical definition of complete and total absence of anything physical, metaphysical or otherwise. Every where I look, everything I read first describes a void, but then populates it with an “energy” or dark energy, or subatomic particles popping in and out of existence, “branes” or what not. I have a problem with this. In this nothingness I have heard a bunch of quantum theorists in turn describe a bunch of something’s in the same breath.
So it begs the question, is there such thing as true void? Is there a state that is stateless and posses no properties what so ever? If so, can absolute nothingness, with nothing interacting with it, beget anything?

I know you are an expert in the field so I figured I’d present my philosophical dilemma at your feet to see if you may have an answer.
Thank you very much, I hope I did not eat up to much of your time.
Regards,[/i]

Quite frankly I did not think he’d respond because he doesn’t know who the hell I am, but he did and here is his response:
[i] short answer: no… the vacuum in quantum theory is alas, full of virtual particles.

Lawrence M. Krauss
Foundation Professor
Director, Origins Initiative
Co-Director, Cosmology Initiative
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY [/i]

Well, that answers that. Something from nothing is still actually something from something. I wonder if he would have answered if he knew my motive?
[/quote]

…very interesting, and unavoidable. Once i wondered what the universe would look like if you’d be able to look back at it from nothingness. I assumed this complete void of anything is what the universe expands in, and realised that you’d see nothing. From the viewpoint of nothingness, nothing ever happened; we, and the universe don’t exist…
[/quote]

Well here’s the deal. He spent an hour on a his speech eloquently explaining general relativity, quantum theory, and all this stuff all to explain that something comes from nothing.
Then, in a sentence that probably took 5 seconds to write and hit send, and it blew away the point of his speech. Not that it wasn’t educational, but we’re back to nothing cannot beget something. And this came from the horse’s mouth.

I am surprised he wrote me back. I took the approach to just ask him what I wanted to know directly rather than blow sunshine up his ass about being a famous author and stuff.

[pat]

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]…i define thought/thinking as the inner monologue that interprets reality. When that’s absent, there’s clear awareness. How do you define thought?

Any mental form or process. [/quote]

…too broad a definition for my taste…[/quote]

It’s a broad topic.

[honest_lifter]

Though I can’t match wits with you guys, I wanted to supply a little comic relief:

Bible translator Ronald Knox was once engaged in a theological discussion with scientist John Scott Haldane. “In a universe containing millions of planets,” reasoned Haldane, “is it not inevitable that life should appear on at least one of them?”
“Sir,” replied Knox, “if Scotland Yard found a body in your cabin trunk, would you tell them: ‘There are millions of trunks in the world-surely one of them must contain a body?’ I think they would still want to know who put it there.”-The Little, Brown Book of Anecdotes.

[ephrem]

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
Though I can’t match wits with you guys, I wanted to supply a little comic relief:

Bible translator Ronald Knox was once engaged in a theological discussion with scientist John Scott Haldane. “In a universe containing millions of planets,” reasoned Haldane, “is it not inevitable that life should appear on at least one of them?”
“Sir,” replied Knox, “if Scotland Yard found a body in your cabin trunk, would you tell them: ‘There are millions of trunks in the world-surely one of them must contain a body?’ I think they would still want to know who put it there.”-The Little, Brown Book of Anecdotes.[/quote]

…at least a body in the trunk… puts on sunglasses …is actual evidence. YYYYYEEEEEAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!

[Makavali]

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
Though I can’t match wits with you guys, I wanted to supply a little comic relief:

Bible translator Ronald Knox was once engaged in a theological discussion with scientist John Scott Haldane. “In a universe containing millions of planets,” reasoned Haldane, “is it not inevitable that life should appear on at least one of them?”
“Sir,” replied Knox, “if Scotland Yard found a body in your cabin trunk, would you tell them: ‘There are millions of trunks in the world-surely one of them must contain a body?’ I think they would still want to know who put it there.”-The Little, Brown Book of Anecdotes.[/quote]

Cute. However, religion hasn’t done the investigative work that Scotland Yard would, they made it up to suit their political agendas.

Now you’ll have to excuse me, I’m listening to Scheherazade by Rimsky Korsakov as conducted by Karajan and not appreciating the beauty of it because I’m an atheist (or so I was told yesterday at uni… good times).

Anyone who hasn’t listened to this song really should btw.

[honest_lifter]

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
Though I can’t match wits with you guys, I wanted to supply a little comic relief:

Bible translator Ronald Knox was once engaged in a theological discussion with scientist John Scott Haldane. “In a universe containing millions of planets,” reasoned Haldane, “is it not inevitable that life should appear on at least one of them?”

“Sir,” replied Knox, “if Scotland Yard found a body in your cabin trunk, would you tell them: ‘There are millions of trunks in the world-surely one of them must contain a body?’ I think they would still want to know who put it there.”-The Little, Brown Book of Anecdotes.[/quote]

…at least a body in the trunk… puts on sunglasses …is actual evidence. YYYYYEEEEEAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!
[/quote]

Lol. Nice one.

[honest_lifter]

“Co-existence without religious insistence.”

[pat]

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
Though I can’t match wits with you guys, I wanted to supply a little comic relief:

Bible translator Ronald Knox was once engaged in a theological discussion with scientist John Scott Haldane. “In a universe containing millions of planets,” reasoned Haldane, “is it not inevitable that life should appear on at least one of them?”
“Sir,” replied Knox, “if Scotland Yard found a body in your cabin trunk, would you tell them: ‘There are millions of trunks in the world-surely one of them must contain a body?’ I think they would still want to know who put it there.”-The Little, Brown Book of Anecdotes.[/quote]

…at least a body in the trunk… puts on sunglasses …is actual evidence. YYYYYEEEEEAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!
[/quote]

Of what?

[ephrem]

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
Though I can’t match wits with you guys, I wanted to supply a little comic relief:

Bible translator Ronald Knox was once engaged in a theological discussion with scientist John Scott Haldane. “In a universe containing millions of planets,” reasoned Haldane, “is it not inevitable that life should appear on at least one of them?”
“Sir,” replied Knox, “if Scotland Yard found a body in your cabin trunk, would you tell them: ‘There are millions of trunks in the world-surely one of them must contain a body?’ I think they would still want to know who put it there.”-The Little, Brown Book of Anecdotes.[/quote]

…at least a body in the trunk… puts on sunglasses …is actual evidence. YYYYYEEEEEAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!
[/quote]

Of what?[/quote]

…evidence of foul play ofcourse!

[pat]

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
Though I can’t match wits with you guys, I wanted to supply a little comic relief:

Bible translator Ronald Knox was once engaged in a theological discussion with scientist John Scott Haldane. “In a universe containing millions of planets,” reasoned Haldane, “is it not inevitable that life should appear on at least one of them?”
“Sir,” replied Knox, “if Scotland Yard found a body in your cabin trunk, would you tell them: ‘There are millions of trunks in the world-surely one of them must contain a body?’ I think they would still want to know who put it there.”-The Little, Brown Book of Anecdotes.[/quote]

…at least a body in the trunk… puts on sunglasses …is actual evidence. YYYYYEEEEEAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!
[/quote]

Of what?[/quote]

…evidence of foul play ofcourse!
[/quote]

Foul play? How’d you come to that conclusion? How do you know somebody didn’t just crawl into a trunk?

[ephrem]

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
Though I can’t match wits with you guys, I wanted to supply a little comic relief:

Bible translator Ronald Knox was once engaged in a theological discussion with scientist John Scott Haldane. “In a universe containing millions of planets,” reasoned Haldane, “is it not inevitable that life should appear on at least one of them?”
“Sir,” replied Knox, “if Scotland Yard found a body in your cabin trunk, would you tell them: ‘There are millions of trunks in the world-surely one of them must contain a body?’ I think they would still want to know who put it there.”-The Little, Brown Book of Anecdotes.[/quote]

…at least a body in the trunk… puts on sunglasses …is actual evidence. YYYYYEEEEEAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!
[/quote]

Of what?[/quote]

…evidence of foul play ofcourse!
[/quote]

Foul play? How’d you come to that conclusion? How do you know somebody didn’t just crawl into a trunk?[/quote]

…that’s for the Yard to find out, isn’t it?

[Makavali]

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
Though I can’t match wits with you guys, I wanted to supply a little comic relief:

Bible translator Ronald Knox was once engaged in a theological discussion with scientist John Scott Haldane. “In a universe containing millions of planets,” reasoned Haldane, “is it not inevitable that life should appear on at least one of them?”
“Sir,” replied Knox, “if Scotland Yard found a body in your cabin trunk, would you tell them: ‘There are millions of trunks in the world-surely one of them must contain a body?’ I think they would still want to know who put it there.”-The Little, Brown Book of Anecdotes.[/quote]

…at least a body in the trunk… puts on sunglasses …is actual evidence. YYYYYEEEEEAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!
[/quote]

Of what?[/quote]

How did you miss the joke?

[cord13]

difference between santa and god? no ones there to tell you at age 8 that theres no god.

[ephrem]

[quote]cord13 wrote:
difference between santa and god? no ones there to tell you at age 8 that theres no god.[/quote]

[pat]

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
Though I can’t match wits with you guys, I wanted to supply a little comic relief:

Bible translator Ronald Knox was once engaged in a theological discussion with scientist John Scott Haldane. “In a universe containing millions of planets,” reasoned Haldane, “is it not inevitable that life should appear on at least one of them?”
“Sir,” replied Knox, “if Scotland Yard found a body in your cabin trunk, would you tell them: ‘There are millions of trunks in the world-surely one of them must contain a body?’ I think they would still want to know who put it there.”-The Little, Brown Book of Anecdotes.[/quote]

…at least a body in the trunk… puts on sunglasses …is actual evidence. YYYYYEEEEEAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!
[/quote]

Of what?[/quote]

…evidence of foul play ofcourse!
[/quote]

Foul play? How’d you come to that conclusion? How do you know somebody didn’t just crawl into a trunk?[/quote]

…that’s for the Yard to find out, isn’t it?
[/quote]
Why would you call the yard…