[quote]pat wrote:
You got me there, I can’t know for sure. But if you know of something that wasn’t the result of something else you likely found God.[/quote]
Why? Do you know every possible thing that’s uncaused and have verified that it was God?
There are a lot of events in quantum mechanics who violate causality; events for which you can’t tell which is the cause and which is the effect.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
Now how’s about you do the right thing and start to show a little compassion for your fellow human beings – even those whom you consider to be deluded.[/quote]
I’m showing nothing BUT compassion. Commiserating with the religiously afflicted does not help them, as it tends to reinforce their delusions. A little “Shock and Awe” has more chance of waking up a few of them. They whose giant wooden boat hasn’t sailed away a long time ago at least.
Somehow I missed your similar admonition to believers…
[quote]pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
You got me there, I can’t know for sure. But if you know of something that wasn’t the result of something else you likely found God.
Why? Do you know every possible thing that’s uncaused and have verified that it was God?
There are a lot of events in quantum mechanics who violate causality; events for which you can’t tell which is the cause and which is the effect.
[/quote]
No they don’t. Just because the effects are not necessarily predictable does not mean it violates causality in any way. People knowing how things work is not necessary for causal relationships.
Through empirical tests we can know that you shoot a single electron at something, somewhere, the resultant effect will be weird.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Chushin wrote:
Now how’s about you do the right thing and start to show a little compassion for your fellow human beings – even those whom you consider to be deluded.
I’m showing nothing BUT compassion. Commiserating with the religiously afflicted does not help them, as it tends to reinforce their delusions. A little “Shock and Awe” has more chance of waking up a few of them. They whose giant wooden boat hasn’t sailed away a long time ago at least.
Somehow I missed your similar admonition to believers… [/quote]
Yeah 'cause it’s real hard to insult people.
[quote]pat wrote:
pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
You got me there, I can’t know for sure. But if you know of something that wasn’t the result of something else you likely found God.
Why? Do you know every possible thing that’s uncaused and have verified that it was God?
There are a lot of events in quantum mechanics who violate causality; events for which you can’t tell which is the cause and which is the effect.
No they don’t. Just because the effects are not necessarily predictable does not mean it violates causality in any way. People knowing how things work is not necessary for causal relationships.
Through empirical tests we can know that you shoot a single electron at something, somewhere, the resultant effect will be weird.[/quote]
I’ll submit your name for the next Nobel Prize in Physics; just make sure you submit your paper explaining how you’ve manager to reinstate causality in QM before then.
[quote]pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
You got me there, I can’t know for sure. But if you know of something that wasn’t the result of something else you likely found God.
Why? Do you know every possible thing that’s uncaused and have verified that it was God?
There are a lot of events in quantum mechanics who violate causality; events for which you can’t tell which is the cause and which is the effect.
No they don’t. Just because the effects are not necessarily predictable does not mean it violates causality in any way. People knowing how things work is not necessary for causal relationships.
Through empirical tests we can know that you shoot a single electron at something, somewhere, the resultant effect will be weird.
I’ll submit your name for the next Nobel Prize in Physics; just make sure you submit your paper explaining how you’ve manager to reinstate causality in QM before then.
[/quote]
Make sure you spell my name right…
Please provide an example of a causeless event in any quantum theory.
[quote]pat wrote:
Make sure you spell my name right…[/quote]
Sure thing, mat.
I didn’t say causeless; I said causality violations. Although many phenomenons might be termed “causeless”, such as radioactive decay. There is no way to predict exactly when an atom will decay; the event is causeless. If it had a cause, we could observe it and predict the decay.
Other examples here: http://www.phy.olemiss.edu/~luca/Topics/c/causal_viol.html and here: causality violation site:arxiv.org - Google Search
[quote]Oleena wrote:
I spent 14 years as a die hard Christian. During that time I studied the Bible with mentors who majored in theology and grew up in Africa as kids of a missionary doctor.
To this day I’m still baffled by how little people understand the religion and the text of the religion that they ascribe to.
Recently I found a test that breaks it down faster than I ever could.
http://www.ffrf.org/quiz/bquiz.php
My challenge to you: take this test and post your score. If you have a Bible handy, look up the verses to assure yourself that this is for real. If you want to save time- I already did because even as an atheist, I was suprised at a few of these. It’s spot on.
Have fun. Give to friends.
[/quote]
So let me get this straight, you were a Christian and then became an Atheist because man’s attempt to understand God (in the form of the Christian religion) is flawed? Too funny!
Just in case you didn’t know, the concept of Atheism also originated with man, and it has holes in it as well.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Doesn’t matter. The god of the atheist requires less responsibility.[/quote]
Duh. A non-existent god requires nothing.
It’s amoral beings such as yourself that require simple rules enforced by fear of eternal torture to behave. I was previously unaware that their existed people so challenged as to be unable to reason a modicum of basic morality by themselves.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Oleena wrote:
I spent 14 years as a die hard Christian. During that time I studied the Bible with mentors who majored in theology and grew up in Africa as kids of a missionary doctor.
To this day I’m still baffled by how little people understand the religion and the text of the religion that they ascribe to.
Recently I found a test that breaks it down faster than I ever could.
http://www.ffrf.org/quiz/bquiz.php
My challenge to you: take this test and post your score. If you have a Bible handy, look up the verses to assure yourself that this is for real. If you want to save time- I already did because even as an atheist, I was suprised at a few of these. It’s spot on.
Have fun. Give to friends.
So let me get this straight, you were a Christian and then became an Atheist because man’s attempt to understand God (in the form of the Christian religion) is flawed? Too funny!
Just in case you didn’t know, the concept of Atheism also originated with man, and it has holes in it as well.
Doesn’t matter. The god of the atheist requires less responsibility.[/quote]
Assuming you don’t care about any of the questions that Atheism or Religion try and answer, then yes, it doesn’t require anything. Probably why many are Atheists, they can do what they want without regard to any moral code or guideline.
[quote]pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
Make sure you spell my name right…
Sure thing, mat.
Please provide an example of a causeless event in any quantum theory.
I didn’t say causeless; I said causality violations. Although many phenomenons might be termed “causeless”, such as radioactive decay. There is no way to predict exactly when an atom will decay; the event is causeless. If it had a cause, we could observe it and predict the decay.
Other examples here: http://www.phy.olemiss.edu/~luca/Topics/c/causal_viol.html and here: causality violation site:arxiv.org - Google Search
[/quote]
Thanks kookie!
Unpredictable effects are still caused even if not able to be observed reliably. Just because the effects are weird and unpredictable, doesn’t mean they are not caused. The resultant effect is just not predictable.
[quote]pat wrote:
pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
Make sure you spell my name right…
Sure thing, mat.
Please provide an example of a causeless event in any quantum theory.
I didn’t say causeless; I said causality violations. Although many phenomenons might be termed “causeless”, such as radioactive decay. There is no way to predict exactly when an atom will decay; the event is causeless. If it had a cause, we could observe it and predict the decay.
Other examples here: http://www.phy.olemiss.edu/~luca/Topics/c/causal_viol.html and here: causality violation site:arxiv.org - Google Search
Thanks kookie!
Unpredictable effects are still caused even if not able to be observed reliably. Just because the effects are weird and unpredictable, doesn’t mean they are not caused. The resultant effect is just not predictable.[/quote]
You need to read the rest of the links. Decay is just an example of perfectly random process, and is sometimes referred to as “uncaused” a term you brought in.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
No such thing as a “non-existent god.” When man eliminates God, man becomes god. Kinda the nature abhors a vacuum deal, bouffon.
Duh.[/quote]
Right. And since you eliminate elves and fairies from things that exist, that means you’re an elvish fairy.
Fits the observable evidence.
[quote]pat wrote:
The true nature of God, we can not know from where we are standing.[/quote]
If you admit that you cannot know the nature of god, why ascribe to a belief system which says god is such and such? Why not choose instead to say “we don’t know”, and leave it at that?
Logic says just the opposite. By definition, if something has ALWAYS existed, it could not have been CAUSED by anything else.
If you’re talking about the big bang theory, which many Christianists dismiss by the way, it doesn’t require matter and energy to have begun at a certain time and place. It still allows for the possibility of an infinite series of expansions and contractions, or an infinite string of universes.
Proven beyond doubt? No, but neither is your god theory. The point is that you cannot logically jump to one of these possibilities and insist it is correct, while dismissing the other explanations out of hand.
[quote]Again, being an uncaused, cause, by definition gives “it” certain properties. It cannot be caused itself, it cannot be bound by the causal chain, and it can cause things to happen, in or out of space/time.
[/quote]
How do you know the universe itself isn’t what you call an “uncaused, cause”?
[quote]forlife wrote:
pat wrote:
The true nature of God, we can not know from where we are standing.
If you admit that you cannot know the nature of god, why ascribe to a belief system which says god is such and such? Why not choose instead to say “we don’t know”, and leave it at that?
[/quote]
We can know certain things by simply coming to a conclusion. For an uncaused, cause to exist it necessarily has to sit out side the causal chain. It is not subject to laws it creates and must posses something like a “will” to have decided to create.
Of course we don’t know, but if we gave up everytime we didn’t know some thing we’d never know anything.
Science itself would not exist if people just gave up.
First, nothing in our universe has always existed. There is no evidence of that empirically.
Second, it is something that was not caused and remains infinitely in that state that cannot have been caused.
Further, there are some who theorize that matter, or “information” rather can be “lost” in black holes. If it is true that it can be destroyed than it could also be true that is was created. Matter’s last chance of escape in a black hole is in the event horizon; once it hits the speed of light it is done. But once it hits the speed of light, there is no time. So if “information” can be destroyed, and would be done so in a timeless state and hence infinite, then it can also be created in said timelessness and hence be infinite, in a temporal sense. Where there is no time, everything exists infinitely.
[quote]
But even empirical science can trace the universe’s beginning to a time and place.
If you’re talking about the big bang theory, which many Christianists dismiss by the way, it doesn’t require matter and energy to have begun at a certain time and place. It still allows for the possibility of an infinite series of expansions and contractions, or an infinite string of universes.
Proven beyond doubt? No, but neither is your god theory. The point is that you cannot logically jump to one of these possibilities and insist it is correct, while dismissing the other explanations out of hand.
Again, being an uncaused, cause, by definition gives “it” certain properties. It cannot be caused itself, it cannot be bound by the causal chain, and it can cause things to happen, in or out of space/time.
How do you know the universe itself isn’t what you call an “uncaused, cause”?[/quote]
The universe as we know it was caused. The information that makes it up, might have been. That still would not nullify the God theory…Ever heard of the saying “God is in the details”? That could also apply…He doesn’t necessarily have to be a big old guy with a long beard. He could be all that makes up all as well.
[quote]pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
Make sure you spell my name right…
Sure thing, mat.
Please provide an example of a causeless event in any quantum theory.
I didn’t say causeless; I said causality violations. Although many phenomenons might be termed “causeless”, such as radioactive decay. There is no way to predict exactly when an atom will decay; the event is causeless. If it had a cause, we could observe it and predict the decay.
Other examples here: http://www.phy.olemiss.edu/~luca/Topics/c/causal_viol.html and here: causality violation site:arxiv.org - Google Search
Thanks kookie!
Unpredictable effects are still caused even if not able to be observed reliably. Just because the effects are weird and unpredictable, doesn’t mean they are not caused. The resultant effect is just not predictable.
You need to read the rest of the links. Decay is just an example of perfectly random process, and is sometimes referred to as “uncaused” a term you brought in.
[/quote]
Which link show said random processes? All the causal violations reported are just unexpected results which is a scientific problem, not a philosophical one.