God Plays Billiards

[Nobrainer]

I was debating with my uncle a little while ago, and it eventually culminated in him claiming that science is in many way like a religion (I blatantly disagree with that comparison, by the way), because when a scientific theory becomes widely accepted among the scientific community, it almost becomes scientific dogma, and anyone who proposes a radical new idea is rarely taken seriously because so many scientists will have staked their entire careers on the existing theory. I confess I found this claim to be quite disturbing, because it goes completely counter to everything I believe in about what scientists should do. What does everyone think about this claim? Does it have any truth to it?

 

In at least some cases it seems to be true. I remember back in 2010 when they announced the tentative discovery of GFAJ-1, the bacterium that supposedly incorporated arsenic into its DNA instead of phosphorus, that the scientist who published her findings almost immediately started receiving piles of jeering condescension from many scientists, and ultimately lost most of her credibility in the scientific community. I remember being extremely indignant by the stance that scientists were taking on this discovery. Admittedly, I do believe that she jumped the gun on announcing her discovery, made only worse by NASA blowing it way out of proportion the way they did, but still, she was just doing what scientists do, albeit somewhat prematurely. The exact same thing happened to the scientists who claimed (and they made it clear that is wasn't yet conclusive) to have discovered neutrinos traveling faster than light earlier this year. What should have been treated as potentially one of the most groundbreaking discoveries in the history of physics was instead met with open contempt by a great many scientists even before their experiment could be reproduced. It's one thing to be skeptical, that is after all one of the defining attributes of all good scientists, but to openly go after scientists who propose new ideas like that just seems to go completely against everything I believe about scientists.

 

Does anyone have any opinions and/or rebukes to my argument? If I've missed the point here please let me know.

 

Einstein was correct, God does not play dice. God plays billiards, and the Big Bang was his break.- C.M.T.

The deepest questions can not be answered by science;

Where did I come from? What powers existence? You see thee are two and only two answers, either our existence is based on a perpetual motion machine which violates the laws in our universe so there must be something forever bigger or there is a God, a conscious being. So either non-intelligent or intelligent. I like the smart way but that is just me being selfish, living forever in love...who wouldn't want that.

 

I believe that I understand the universe in three dimensions, in which time, space and the process that generates gravitation are point of origin actions of a process of wave generation and alignment. I cold called Lawerence Krauss and he was polite and gave me one minute of his time. I took :77 sec and then there was silence, if felt dead air awkward, and finally he said; " if you're right then the rest of us are wrong and waisted our lives so you can't be right." and then he hung up the phone.

Today science, astrophysics and Theoritical Physics is no closer to understanding the universe than they were when they looked up at sky 10,000 years ago.

By contemplating the words of God in the bible, we can summize that time is variable, a thousand years is like a day, we are told that the Earth is a circle and that we were told that from the beginning. The most man can live is 120 years, with Eve, God shows that science can take a rib cell and create another being. Maybe he is showing us the cell to use to repair ourselves. Marriage and monogamy help propagate the species disease free.

So it boils down to this, did man create God as one hypothesis of many to explain the universe, or did God create man with the free will to discover, to question, to learn that the real answers are not phusocal answers bit are spiritual and they all get answered by helpIng one another out of unselfish love?

If God created the universe and the universe glorifies him (psalm 19), and he has shown the world who he is, Father, Son and Holy spirit, then I might think that the universe might have a Trinitarian relationship for life to exist.

One universe three dimensions

Atoms come in three densities, solid, liquid and gas.

Atons come with three structures, protons, nutrons and elections

Protons and Netrons can be broken down into three quarks each.

Within mass there are three forces, strong, weak and electromagnetic fields.

As mass and energy decay into monopole gravitational waves three density dependent actions are generated, time, space and gravity which are direct results of mass and energy decay.

Three colors can make all the colors, third planet.

On and on. So do you really think we have the mental capacity to put all that together and then create God to match it?

If we did?' We could create a universe and then watch as the ones we love question our existence... LOL

Edited September 3, 2012 by Nobrainer

[w0rld]

No, God clearly played poker, as was pointed out by Brian Green in "The Fabric of the Cosmos." Just joking thhough. Interesting topic. Nice speculation.

[JMJones0424]

Nobrainer-

 

Instead of picking through the word salad, I'm curious why the number three is so important to you. I have three toes on my left foot. What does that mean?

 

Why did you neglect gravity in your list of forces?

 

Why did you neglect plasma in your list of "atom densities"?

 

You realize that the way we see color is directly related to the physical nature of our eyes, not any fundamental nature of light, right? Some people are born with only two functioning types of cones, and they see only two primary colors. Most birds and some other animals have four types of cones. An unlucky few have only one functioning type of cone cells, and therefore, their rainbow is made of varying shades of one color. Another group of people have all three cones, but some are not as sensitive as the general populace, or they are sensitive to a slightly different frequency curve than the general populace, so while they have three primary colors, they are different colors than the majority of humans.

 

 

 

 

Confirming one's preconceived notions is a slippery thing. You are tempted to find evidence everywhere, and if you've got no good way of distinguishing between fact and fiction, how do you know you're finding truth in your confirmations? I don't think you understand most of anything you've written in this post.