| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 141533 | 2016-01-03 22:18:00 | It is a marvelous world that we live in. | Roscoe (6288) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1413901 | 2016-01-12 00:27:00 | Let's not start quibbling over the meaning of words, I'm sure you got the basic Idea of what I was trying to say. Yes if the whole universe is governed by the same laws then nothing is truly random - except it all is. What I mean by that is, if the size of something is large enough and there are enough factors contributing to an event it becomes more and more like it's random because we can't possibly measure every little thing that contributes. When that size is the whole universe and we start approaching an infinite number of possibilities and contributing factors then we start approaching true randomness and even if you still don't consider that random there is no way to demonstrate the difference. To simplify my earlier statement; we know that life has occurred (whether randomness is involved or not) We know the most likely conditions required for life We can make an estimate of how common those conditions are Based on that we can say that the chance of life occurring somewhere else is pretty good, or even probable Another way to look at it is this (and sorry delving into statistics again), if life is not random and is the inevitable result of the right combination of conditions then it would seem highly unlikely that in all the vastness of time and space of the known universe those conditions have only happened once. It doesn't truly matter if it's random or just appears that way. Also it's not that scientists don't have any Idea how life could have started, rather it's that they don't know which one of the great many possible ways is the right one. They have actually managed to make some headway into creating the first stages of life in a laboratory based on current theories and one day may actually succeed. Nature of course had a lot more time to do it than we have had so far. Religion is far more guilty of the "god of the gaps" practice you accuse science of. Every time a transitional fossil is found it's either denied or in the minds of creationists creates 2 more gaps that need to be filled with more transitional fossils. That's where the term comes from after all. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1413902 | 2016-01-12 01:58:00 | Science seems to have recently found a definite gap: www.bbc.com It is a remarkable world, for indeed we are looking for that god particle, " god particle why the higgs boson matters ". We can clone Dolly the sheep and perhaps many other annimals'/mammals' we don't know about, yet we balk at a master cloner !. lurking. |
Lurking (218) | ||
| 1413903 | 2016-01-12 03:27:00 | "It sure seems to me that God exists, therefore he exists." That's what a lot of religious people say. You Dugi say "It sure seems to me that randomness exists, therefore it exists." (in words equivalent to that) That's not very scientific! You've got to prove that God or randomness exists (take your pick depending on your persuasion). AFAIK the only would-be proof of randomness is in atomic physics, and even then the Anthropic Principle is an alternative non-random explanation of the phenomena (and a better one in my opinion). Take the Schroedinger Cat experiment. Suppose that it is conducted in Bermuda and the cat is replaced by a butterfly. If the butterfly survives, it flaps its wings and triggers a complete extinction of humans in 30 years. In 50 years, people say "Well of course the butterfly had to die. We wouldn't be here if it had lived." So what we thought was random turned out, 50 years later, to be non-random. The quantum superposition in the Schroedinger experiment can be seen as a place-holder for our future. This is an extreme example of the Anthropic Principle. In more mundane terms, it comes down to saying "If the past weren't exactly the way it was, the present would not be exactly the way it is." |
BBCmicro (15761) | ||
| 1413904 | 2016-01-12 06:31:00 | I gave my explanation but in case you missed it infinite possibilities = randomness. A pattern can only be said to exist if the conditions are known and finite. In an infinite universe randomness must exist. Nowhere did I say words anywhere near equivalent to your misinterpretation. A logical conclusion is your are deliberately choosing not to see any of my points and instead inventing a position for me to supposedly be arguing. If you want to use physics and you like the ridiculous shroedingers cat experiment then the uncertainty principle pretty much relies on randomness. If we can't know a particles position until we observe it then there is no predictable pattern at that level. We can only work on probabilities. Incidentally the cat was either alive or dead, not both. The whole argument rests on us not knowing until we observe it which may have a point in physics but in the case of the cat there is an underlying truth we are just not privy to (which may be true of physics also). Also if you put a cat in a box it'll let you know it's alive at some point. Anyway, fun as this is we are drifting further and further from the original topic. Went for a walk to Omaru falls on saturday. Didn't see another human being the whole time and it was a beautiful day and the falls were worth the walk. Wonderful scenery indeed nature has produced (randomly of course). |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1413905 | 2016-01-12 06:38:00 | I went for a swim at Rabbit island on Sunday, there were a few people there I didn't know any of them therefore they were completely random | gary67 (56) | ||
| 1413906 | 2016-01-12 19:56:00 | check this out www.youtube.com distance is mind boggling a good watch |
Gobe1 (6290) | ||
| 1413907 | 2016-01-13 06:25:00 | And then there is this old gem . Good old copper wire After having dug to a depth of 10 feet last year, British scientists found traces of copper wire dating back 200 years and came to the conclusion that their ancestors already had a telephone network more than 150 years ago . Not to be outdone by the British, in the weeks that followed, an American archaeologist dug to a depth of 20 feet, and shortly after, a story published in the New York Times: "American archaeologists, finding traces of 250-year-old copper wire, and have concluded that their ancestors already had an advanced high-tech communications network 50 years earlier than the British" . One week later, Auckland Star Times reported the following: "After digging as deep as 30 feet in his backyard in Otara, Auckland, New Zealand, Hone, a self-taught archaeologist, reported that he found absolutely bugger-all . Hone has therefore, concluded that 250 years ago, New Zealand had already gone wireless . " Makes me feel bloody proud, to be a New Zealander . :D |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1413908 | 2016-01-13 06:34:00 | And if you have ever wondered just how insignificant our marvelous world is, have a look at this: youtu.be |
Roscoe (6288) | ||
| 1413909 | 2016-01-14 19:39:00 | What rubbish. We can figure out there is a 3rd dimension and that would be what a 3d thing would look like. Like in our 3d world people have figured out about other dimensional representations in 3d. There is no proof of god or gods and plenty of proof of none. Some people just have a blockage in their brains and listen to the twaddle others stuff it full of and can't get past that. What rubbish. There's unlimited proof of a supreme Creator, the one and only true God. |
Greg (193) | ||
| 1413910 | 2016-01-14 20:02:00 | What rubbish. There's unlimited proof of a supreme Creator, the one and only true God. That's just opinion, there is no proof and can be no proof. Also which of the hundreds of "one true gods" have you chosen to believe is the real one. "I don't understand it so god must have done it" is not proof of anything. Just because you believe a thing doesn't make it true, if you can accept that about me why not accept it about yourself. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 | |||||