Science and Magic

[karthi]

I want to read books on Explanations of science and, Magic and Religious beliefs.

[swansont]

That's pretty wide open, since science and magic/religion don't overlap in how they explain things. But Carl Sagan's Demon-Haunted World discusses scientific inquiry and how magic/religion come up short in those terms.

[lukey]

There's plenty of books from religion or 'God' from a scientific view if you're after something like that, The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins of Mind of God by Paul Davies.

[iNow]

That's pretty wide open, since science and magic/religion don't overlap in how they explain things. But Carl Sagan's Demon-Haunted World discusses scientific inquiry and how magic/religion come up short in those terms.

 

+1.

[thedarkshade]

I want to read books on Explanations of science and, Magic and Religious beliefs.

I'd strongly recommend you to focus a lot more in science, since there are many many very interesting things and facts that will make you forget the rest. Plus, you will gradually start to find out how world works then you in a way are reading God's mind. All what you seem to be interested in you will find by just science. It's the thing:rolleyes:!

[insane_alien]

reality tends to be more interesting, weird and wacky than religion magic or even good old insanity can ever hope to be. focus on the science.

[Lance]

One time I built a railgun powered by magic. It was pretty sweet.

[karthi]

Thanks for ur suggestions on books, does anybody have any interesting info about science and magic. Do they do logical trick in street/stage magic or is there anything unknown to science

[iNow]

There are a lot of things unknown to science, but that doesn't mean that magic becomes a logical explanation for those things. It just means that it is, at present, unknown.

[wwilliam]

I am student of Information Technology and have studied some books about magic. There are certain things or facts those are out of range of science but that does not mean that is magic. Hopefully science will discover the myth those things in future.

[CDarwin]

Thanks for ur suggestions on books, does anybody have any interesting info about science and magic. Do they do logical trick in street/stage magic or is there anything unknown to science

 

I think you just want something like "how does that trick work," right?

 

Here's what an Amazon search came up with: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/104-1465664-9459169?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=The+Science+of+Magic&x=0&y=0

One of those might be good; I don't know.

 

I'd recommend the show Mythbusters, too, if you can get it.

[ian23]

science are for facts... majic is for entertainment... (o_O)/ abrakadabra !!!

[magicmike]

karthi

I have been a amateur magician (magic ticks, not voodoo or occult) for about 20 years. Can probably answer some questions you have.

Are you referring to principals of science presented as magic/religion? There is very little documentation on this but several Greek inventors created things such as constantly refilling basins and automatic opening doors. Look up Hero of Alexandria and Dedi

 

also

A History of Magic and Experimental Science during the First Thirteen Centuries of Our Era by Lynn Thorndike

 

And this may help too http://biblioflip.com/news/index.php?module=PayPalCart&func=detail&pid=14

 

Image is from http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/HeronAlexandria-Dateien

 

Alchemy can also give you insight to magic and science, expect to do a ton of research just to translate the coded text though.

[Genecks]

How about reading a book about metaphysics? Metaphysics, anyone?

 

YES, ABOVE POSTER!!

 

That book is exactly the first thing that crossed my mind.

I have been meaning to read it.

 

A History of Magic and Experimental Science during the First Thirteen Centuries of Our Era by Lynn Thorndike

[Yeti]

How about some of the Creation Science material if you are interested in science and religion? The 'Answers book' and the creationontheweb site which has plenty of resources?

[iNow]

There's no such thing as "creation science." Saying "god did it" isn't science, nor is it explanatory or useful.

[Sisyphus]

How about reading a book about metaphysics? Metaphysics, anyone?

 

Metaphysics is a legitimate branch of philosophy, and not comparable to the hocus pocus stuff. It's a term that gets misused a lot, but hey, so does "science."

[Yeti]

Thank inow for the link to the pale blue dot by Sagan. It's a sobering piece. It does seem that you know very little about creation science. To say it equates to 'God did it' shows that you have never seriously investigated their claims. As a trained engineer I found their scientific evidence and arguments very satisfying and helpful and the anti ones lacking. If you can read Dr. Werner Gitt's book 'In the beginning was information' and scientifically refute him then I guess I'll say no more. However, you just may be surprised

[Klaynos]

Thank inow for the link to the pale blue dot by Sagan. It's a sobering piece. It does seem that you know very little about creation science. To say it equates to 'God did it' shows that you have never seriously investigated their claims. As a trained engineer I found their scientific evidence and arguments very satisfying and helpful and the anti ones lacking. If you can read Dr. Werner Gitt's book 'In the beginning was information' and scientifically refute him then I guess I'll say no more. However, you just may be surprised

 

Lots of us have looked very closely at their ideas and they're not science. They are unscientific in many many many ways, none of their claims stand up to argument or evidence. This is a science forum, it is not the place to discuss creationism.

[Yeti]

I'm genuinely sorry you feel that way. It does make me feel like I have no intellectual ability whatsoever. There is no need to shout someone down who disagrees with you. We'll just agree to disagree.

[ecoli]

nobody is "shouting" Yeti.

[iNow]

We'll just agree to disagree.

 

You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

[pioneer]

One person's science is another person's magic. In other words, the layman may marvel at technology. The sees how it functions in terms of affect, but have no idea how it works. In their mind, they picture a bunch of genius geeks contriving mechanisms. These "geniuses" are almost placed on a pedestal in a mythological fantasy. On the factory floor, they are just Joe or Bob. When the mind reaches its own frontiers, the imagination becomes active and this myth affect will often kick in. In the past, there wasn't a lot of literature to appease the myth affect, so everything was magic.

 

Where this magic affect lies, is in one of the final frontiers of science, which is the human brain and mind. It reflects natural workings of the mind. This should be an area where all scientists should be trained since mythology can still be active even in a reasonable person. For example, theoretical physics has many scenarios for the same things. They can't all be right. Some are magic tricks. They won't be called magic because science doesn't do magic tricks. That is why you need to rely on reason instead of faith. Common sense says mutually exclusive means they can't both be true at the same time. Thanks to this mind phenomena, even science can be tricked. When the virtual door opens magically with math, the god of science must be doing this. He is all powerful. If you dig below the ground (unconscious mind) and look at premises it is a mind machine. In this case the machine is innate within how the unconscious mind works in a natural way.

 

With Las Vegas magic acts, you know the big time, it is always useful to have a pretty babe to draw attention. This distracts the audience so they don't easily see the magician's hands. The goal is to make you see the final affect, which is magic. What is interesting about the mind mechanism is the magician may not even be aware he is doing magic. The mind is at work fooling themselves with its own magic. I like science, but I like to figure out how the tricks works. Not all science is this way, but some is.

[MedGen]

I'm genuinely sorry you feel that way. It does make me feel like I have no intellectual ability whatsoever. There is no need to shout someone down who disagrees with you. We'll just agree to disagree.

 

Creationism is not science, intelligent design is not science. They bring no evidence to the table at all, their claims have been refuted numerous times throughout the last 150 years because...they have no evidence. There is nothing in observational reality that has been observed that can be used to support the claims of creationists and ID proponents and their wack conjectures. They are not scientific theories, they have no applications, they make spurious predictions, and most of all they are unfalsifiable.

 

The theory of evolution however has every biological field of science supporting it from ecology to paleontology, even right down to the molecular sciences of molecular biology, genetics and biochemistry. What is the likelihood that ToE is bunk when it has every aspect of biology supporting it? Last year alone there were some 18,000 peer reviewed journal articles published throughout the world in reputable journals in support of evolution, for creaitonism? None.

[Klaynos]

I'm genuinely sorry you feel that way. It does make me feel like I have no intellectual ability whatsoever. There is no need to shout someone down who disagrees with you. We'll just agree to disagree.

 

Science is cruel, it's trial by fire. You propose something it's YOUR responsibility to back it up with evidence, creation does not do this, it just stand around pointing flaws in evolution which if you actually know anythign about evolution you'll realise that they are not flaws just the people talking about them are not understanding what they're talking about.

 

Science requires evidence.

Religion requires belief.

 

They are two very separate things.