MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on Jun 9, 2019 21:25:54 GMT -8
That's a valiant effort, Luca. However, the only way any of us will ever be able to comprehend this stuff is if we invite Wabash to this forum so he can explain it to us in simple language we can all understand.
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Jun 10, 2019 6:01:08 GMT -8
Luca, can you summarize what was contained in that article in a way that a 5th grader could understand? I need some type of foundation to start this quest. .... As regards the sentence " Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen":
I have a hard time understanding that using the normal definition of those English words. "Faith" is not a substance, nor is it evidence. For that sentence to make sense you have to utilize a definition of those words contrary to the commonly understood meaning, and so I don’t understand it. When you say, Dave, that you know something not of an "earth bound perspective" and that the knowledge comes from God, the discussion becomes a bit circular. I am by definition "earth bound", and when you say that you know that there is a God because that knowledge comes from God, it doesn’t leave a lot of room for debate... Exactly. to my understanding, there is only room for debate if we leave God Out of it. effectively, what I have offered is a bifurcation of the concept of “know:”. One, the definition we all use and with which we are comfortable, is related to the scientific method of establishing certitude. The other, with which we are not comfortable basically flies in the face of the scientific method but adds an aspect we must embrace (“God”), who is mostly incomprehensible to our human brains. but isn’t that how we humans adjust our understanding? Even in the scientific method, the theory we believe we have proven is adjusted when we add or remove parameters? I’m adding the parameter of God (which, by the way, we cannot “prove” by conventional means), which changes the outcome... right? |
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Jun 10, 2019 6:03:09 GMT -8
That's a valiant effort, Luca. However, the only way any of us will ever be able to comprehend this stuff is if we invite Wabash to this forum so he can explain it to us in simple language we can all understand. That won’t work. Ive also tried to explain it to Wabash... and Parrot... and Fordama. FTR, Parrot Paul was the first to leave the conversation, and Fordama lasted the longest, but still did not comprehend the spiritual aspect of faith. |
|
Bick
Administrator 
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Nov 16, 2019 10:12:58 GMT -8
The idea of Black holes in the universe has fascinated me. If these black holes truly exist, and act as a giant vacuum cleaner, how long before we get sucked in... especially if they're THIS big?
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Nov 16, 2019 11:54:35 GMT -8
The idea of Black holes in the universe has fascinated me. If these black holes truly exist, and act as a giant vacuum cleaner, how long before we get sucked in... especially if they're THIS big? IF it happens that we get sucked in, - It will hallen whether or not we worry about...or understand...it; and
- It will happen well beyond our life span, or that of our children, grandchildren, or great grandchildren.
I apologize for sounding dismissive. The concept of black holes is ponderous.
however (and I apologize for this, too)
believing as I do in an omnipotent and omniscient God, my operating assumption is, He is not surprised by anything. All of time is His “now.” And anything related to the end of the world as we know it 🎶 He not only already knows, but has planned for.
|
|
|
|
Post by captaintrips on Nov 24, 2019 17:43:46 GMT -8
Funny thing is, ... I've been studying and wondering about this.. theorizing on.. whatever, for awhile...but funny how when you read something like the article in the opening post, it says something like this; " ..Lemaître, who later served as president of the Vatican’s academy of sciences — rewinds the expansion of the universe back to a hot, dense bundle of energy. But where did the initial energy come from?..." Now if you start wondering about matter and all it's weirdness, you might think of strange items like black holes. If you read about black holes, you'll learn that their temperature is near or at absolute zero ! Weird huh ? Matter packed together tightly sets itself on fire and becomes a sun/star. Pack even more in and it collapses into a neutron star where things start to get weird. Pack MORE in, it becomes a black hole where it becomes a point and we don't understand it. Other than that nothing escapes it.... though it does slowly decay - or so we're told it may .. in theory. But then were told that all the matter in the universe must have expanded from a "hot fiery mass" or " a hot, dense bundle of energy." ?It seems like we understand so very little about the fundamentals of matter when we find ourselves at impossible to cross limits like this. How would we ever find a way to learn what happens to matter in a black hole ? What does it do ? We can only theorize. And so the more we know, the more it seems we find that we DON'T know and maybe this is why many of us believe in God. Interesting article here - www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/11/a_simple_proof_of_intelligent_design.html.....Ultimately, my point was that despite all these exotic theories I don't think they can ever explain where, when or how matter/energy came into existence, and that " We'll never know" how it all started………………………………Luca And it's all we really have, a lot of exotic and " hard to understand" theories. We don't really even understand basic matter. As is illustrated in so many ways LOL |
|
|
|
Post by captaintrips on Jan 12, 2020 18:23:13 GMT -8
How little we know . . . We measure time in years, months, hours and days etc... all meaningless everywhere except on this microcosm we call Earth We think we know how and when " the universe" came about Even though we do NOT The " big bang" theory has been under assault for a long time - many don't know this It's under question/doubt once again It's all very interesting these things - black holes, dark matter, dark energy, the big bang, steady state, time etc They all show us how really powerless and ... ignorant we are, and always will be... Of course this is all theory.. and always will be... someday we'll KNOW ... a different theory and ...Of course this is all theory.. and always will be... someday we'll KNOW ... a different theory and ... [ limited repeat ] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Scientist explodes what millions believe: There was no 'Big Bang'Is everything what experts claim about our origins about to change?... scientists "believe that precise amounts of helium, deuterium and lithium were produced by fusion reactions in the dense, extremely hot cloud of chemical elements that emerged after the Big Bang." But Lerner found that older stars don't have the right percentages of those elements."He found that old stars had less than half the helium and less than one tenth the lithium than is predicted by the Big Bang nucleosynthesis theory, which posits that a quarter of the universe's mass is comprised of helium ," the report said.Lerner, who has expounded on his beliefs in his book "The Big Bang Never Happened ," said no helium or lithium was created before the development of the first stars in our galaxy.The conflicting evidence, he said, has been ignored."The Big Bang should have resulted in the annihilation of matter and antimatter, leaving a surviving density of matter that would be a hundred billion times less than that observed ," Lerner said in the statement CN obtained."To avoid that outcome, Big Bang theory requires an asymmetry of matter and antimatter with consequences, such as the decay of the proton, which have been contradicted by extensive experiments ."Lerner's concerns were revealed this week at a meeting of the American Astronomical Society.He called for abandonment of the "hypothesis of the Big Bang ."www.wnd.com/2020/01/scientist-explodes-millions-believe-no-big-bang/Comment below article - patgo WoodyJohnson •... Not so fast. There are competing theories about what causes the evidence we see, such as the Doppler effect. The dispute over Big Bang versus Steady State is probably as good an illustration as any of the turmoil in cosmology, which is really based on a great deal of conjecture and very little evidence. This area of inquiry is in a constant state of flux. So you can't say that ANYTHING about the universe is obvious, including its age. Just as a single example, we don't know that the speed of light has been or is even now a constant. In fact, I can show you that the speed of light is different in air than it is in water. It is said to be a constant in a vacuum, but then I scratch my head and say, if there is all that dark matter out there, it isn't a vacuum, is it? So what does that do to the speed of light? We have a dickens of a time with anything regarding the universe because we can't get out there and play with it. Our ability to do controlled experiments is severely limited. |
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Jan 12, 2020 20:51:05 GMT -8
The more we know, the more we realize how little we know....
|
|
|
|
Post by captaintrips on Jan 13, 2020 6:35:14 GMT -8
The more we know, the more we realize how little we know.... Then we brag about how knowledgeable we are and argue about it ! Yeah, we're 'so advanced' LOL plus ça change, plus c'est la même choseSilly humans |
|
