Celtic Heroes

Btw, when Steven hawking lost the bet im fairly sure he gave Leonard a basketball dictionary or something stating the burning of the dictionary was like the Big Bang, sorry I forget the specifics

To quite michio kaku. "A hypothesis must go through thousands of tests before being proven, and if it fails but one test, you are in-correct." Michio kaku is one of my fav physicists because he specialises in string theory, and he built a 6 giga-hertz atom smasher in his garage, and his school actually had enough money to afford 22 miles of copper cables, over here in Britain the schools are bankrupt lol

How about we all stop arguing about if theirs a god or not and start paying attention to real problems ?

How about we all stop arguing about if theirs a god or not and start paying attention to real problems ?

That would be excellent. If only the world would keep opinions based outside of facts to themselves it would probably be a better place.

To quite michio kaku. "A hypothesis must go through thousands of tests before being proven, and if it fails but one test, you are in-correct." Michio kaku is one of my fav physicists because he specialises in string theory, and he built a 6 giga-hertz atom smasher in his garage, and his school actually had enough money to afford 22 miles of copper cables, over here in Britain the schools are bankrupt lol

Yes he's pretty cool. Stephen hawking is more of the Evel Knievel of physics. When he lands it it's awesome and when he wipes it's an awesome fireball.

Almost completely wrong. Sorry but it is. In science you are forced to accept facts. This includes data that is collected by thousands of independent sources in a plethora of ways. That is incontrovertible and undeniable. Any shot at having a theory must account for all past facts. There is no room for this not being a possibility. Period. The only possibility is in the tiny unexplained areas for which we have not taken enough data yet. This is why it is impossible to ever prove science wrong. Newtons law of forces and gravitation is still so perfect and correct it is taught in grade school and high schools. It was right then. It is right now. It is forever right. Quantum mechanics, relativity, string theory are just add ons that simplify to newtons laws at everyday scales.

The argument I am making is not about science but about what science has proven. I am not sure what else I can say, or rather repeat, about the nature of science. We both understand that concepts proven by science are considered facts but then you seem to act exactly as the "way too religious" people do, which is to find an idea and then sit on it without moving forward.

Newton's laws are indeed correct but you still have to at least accept the possibility that they are not correct or at least not complete. If you can not do this, then you can not expect others to look beyond religion.

They are 2.5 centuries old and still correct as they will be eternally. They follow from basic precepts of calculus and are quite mathematically elegant.

There is quite a bit of confusion among laypersons that every advance undermines everything that came before but it is the opposite. It is the solid fundamentals that lead to new advancements. Without this foundation there is no hope for anything. Without a solid foundation in mathematics, logic, and empirical data it would be no more than superstition.

Yes we could all be living in the matrix right now which was a documentary of reality leaked by Morpheus. But you cannot base decisions upon that. Until there is a mathematical, logical, or empirically measured basis it warrants no consideration for our finite time and resources. There is a near infinity of bullcrap and yet likely only a single theory - perhaps that can be fit onto a shirt - that can explain our entire universe. To willfully throw yourself from reason is not only a waste of your life it is dangerous for yourself and those around you.

I could make a funny parallel to Pascal's wager but it's a bit too sad and soon for it to be funny.

There is quite a bit of confusion among laypersons that every advance undermines everything that came before but it is the opposite. It is the solid fundamentals that lead to new advancements. Without this foundation there is no hope for anything. Without a solid foundation in mathematics, logic, and empirical data it would be no more than superstition.

I never said it undermines everything but there is still a change. You have to stand up and look around for another seat that could be similiar or completely different. All that writing and you could not just say "I agree"? Lol -.-

How about we all stop arguing about if theirs a god or not and start paying attention to real problems ?

We can pay attention to other issues, but talking about religion is the point of this thread.

That is my point exactly, nothing can exist eternally inside the laws of this universe, but there has to be an eternity, our universe has to be eternal or has to have came from something eternal, I am arguing that something being eternal makes it a god because there is no other option.

There are plenty of other options besides a 'Christian non catholic god'. In fact infinite.

It depends on how you slice the universe as to what is inside it. Anything before would also be just another part of the universe. Outside the visible universe is just the universe also. It may be that all possibility is connected we just don't have evidence one way or the other as of today.

Evidence for mathematics is that it was present and functioning at the beginning of time from out perspective. This implies that it could also be outside of our time frame. It is definitely not constrained to our reality as it is an abstract set axioms and logical functions. It is not man made as man was not around at the beginning of time. It can be unearthed and discovered only.

Evidence of god if you are going to make that claim please.

As I said what we see may be simply the eternal truth of extremely simple logical rules. No magic sky beard man who cares so much about where you put your wang required.

I never said there are no other options besides a 'Christian non catholic god', I said that something being eternal makes it a god by my definition. Remember I defined a god as an existence operation outside the laws of physics of this universe. I am saying that the laws of the universe do not permit anything to be eternal, and anything outside of the laws of this universe is classified as a god because we cannot classify it or understand it any other way. We lack the ability to measure eternity. Simple logic says that if a=b and b=c then a=c, so if eternal=outside of the laws of the universe and outside of the laws of the universe=god, then eternal=god. I don't know where you are pulling all this bearded man in the sky crap from, but stop changing things I say to something else.
Also I have said before, mathematics is just a system ("language" if you will) expressing the way the laws in our universe work, or should work ideally. Numbers and functions are concepts, there is no such thing as a 2 outside of our minds. And there is no way for our universe as it exists now to have always existed or be the only thing that exists or for everything that exists outside of our universe to be governed by the same laws. Our universe is not sufficient on its own, unless there was a time where its current laws were not in effect, it cannot exist without something outside of it existing capable of breaking its laws.

On a different note, what school did you earn your degree at? I am a Biochemistry major at Kettering and they offer your degree.

So did god make dinosaurs... Or did he destroy them to make humans? :O