Are the laws of physics based on magic?

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by Mazulu, Sep 8, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,096
    As am I.

    The fault is mine for not making a more convincing esoteric argument in context of this thread and its connection with morality.

    Carlin was crude, but his observations were about human behaviors and "walking the talk", in spite of 2000+ years of religion. Are the laws of nature based on magic or on the inherent potential throughout the "wholeness" of the universe?
    Bohm calls it, the Holomovent ( not holymovement).
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    You follow Bohm, I follow Jesus. Does Bohm follow Jesus?

    Hey there is a funeral on Tuesday, and work tomorrow, so I'm laying low for a day or two to honour Carol's son. We'll catch up in a few days OK.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2013
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,096
    What has that got to do with the OP?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    There are two sides of the brain. The left brain is differential and rational, while the right side of the brain is spatial and integral. Scientific investigation benefits by the left brain since it help use isolate, differentiate and then rationalize a phenomena. The right brain, because it is spatial and integrates data, is the side that will develops theory for spatial context. The right brain will do prophesy, since this side of the brain will integrate the data into a 3-D whole bringing data together.

    Picture the 3-D or spatial data of the right brain as a ball that exist in 3-D space. The ball is only an analogy. We can approximate the ball with a large number of circles, all with a common center, but each at different angles. This circles are 2-D, where cause and effect are the x,y axis. The right brain collects the data and logic circles made by the careful differential observations of the left brain and using common centers (about the same subject) generates 3-D data balls. A good theory is spatial and can take into account all the circles.

    Next, picture one of these 3-D data balls being hit by a tennis racket. The entire ball distorts and upon rebound flexing until it returns to steady state. Relative to the 2-D circles these become pushed out of their planes. This is felt as an intuition that says that what it appears is not exactly what is shall be since the 3-D ball is also advancing under its own form of 3-D logic. This can seem magical.

    For example, the earth was believed to be flat for centuries, because observation seemed to indicate this. The logic and observation circles all added up and appeared to be consistent with the detailed observations anyone could make. But brewing in the mind of early science was the right brain 3-D data ball composed of this data circles. The unconscious flex of this ball (gut feeling) gave them ideas to explore a different avenue which confirmed the earth was round. This confirmation shook all the old logic planes out of place. This was scary for the status quo, so this was suppressed until the tennis ball stopped vibrating in their minds.
     
  8. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,096
  9. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    I was trying to understand the origin of your beliefs in this scientific magic.
     
  10. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
  11. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,096
    Well, I had a lengthy response to your question of "scientific magic" as compared to "spiritual truth", but the program lost it and I have no further desire to discuss distractions. I have provided all the information necessary to draw your own conclusions. So I am done here.
     
  12. Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    Some questions are hard to answer, I agree.
     
  13. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Physics laws become magic when it has tunnel vision , which it has
     
  14. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,874
    What does "it" refer to?
     
  15. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Mainstream science
     
  16. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,874
    How can a process have "tunnel view"? Do you personally know a lot about science?
     
  17. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    Why do you jump to the most preposterous conclusions instead of looking for the simplest one first? That's Occam's Razor in a nutshell, and you simply DO NOT UNDERSTAND IT. This is what bothers me most about you: You simply do not bother to THINK LOGICALLY. Your brain bounces around looking for the most attractive, fanciful stuff, and you ignore everything else because it just isn't enough fun.

    Science is hard work, and you are not a hard worker. You want everything to be easy and fun.

    Isn't it possible that the reason we can't define consciousness is that we just haven't studied it enough? We've only been able to map regions of the brain for a few decades, and only at a very high level. We're going to have to do a lot better than that before we can start following thoughts around in somebody's brain.

    You have ZERO PATIENCE! You're not willing to wait for a difficult process to be completed, so you jump in and postulate a supernatural explanation. Somehow you think that's an improvement. I don't understand why, because YOUR hypothesis hasn't been proven either, and on top of that YOU NEVER SUPPLY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT OR A METHODOLOGY FOR TESTING IT. So until you do, IT CAN NEVER BE TESTED SO IT CAN NEVER BE PROVEN TRUE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

    You seem to regard your role here as a one-man Peanut Gallery, shouting out random thoughts to the scientists on the stage, because their work isn't exciting enough and fast enough and you're getting bored. (Or since you're surely too young to remember Howdy Doody, a one-man Statler and Waldorf.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )

    Why do you have so little faith in scientists that you presume that they will NEVER be able to figure out what caused it? It's only been about one century since we realized that there even was a Big Bang. We've learned a lot about it in that time. There's more to learn. You just have to be patient, and that seems to be utterly impossible for you. You must have ADHD or something like that. You're utterly useless in a discussion like this. You bounce around like a ping-pong ball, looking for something exciting, and when you don't find anything you just start shouting preposterous assertions at us to try to make something happen.

    But a hypothesis must be presented with a least a modicum of evidence before anyone will treat it with respect. And you have NEVER presented any evidence. Your hypothesis, therefore, is not worthy of respect. You're rapidly falling into that same category yourself. I notice that a growing number of the people who post on this thread are getting sick of your middle school-level understanding of science (at least that's the way you present it), your grade-school level of patience with the scientific method (again, that's the way you present it), and your Stone Age reliance on preposterous supernatural explanations for things you don't understand.

    Is this really the way you like to be perceived? Is this what the chicks go for these days? The 1960s are sure over!

    Why do you bother posting on a science board when, basically, you have absolutely no respect for science, you haven't even bothered to learn how it works, and when somebody tries to explain it to you (in my case at least three times for one simple part of science: Occam's Razor) you stick your fingers in your ears and go La La La La La, then push your own Restart button and repeat the same antiscientific stuff you already typed twelve pages ago?

    At first I assumed that you just don't want to learn. Now I'm beginning to think that you're incapable of it. You have not learned one thing from this thread. It's been a complete waste of time.

    As I suggested a moment ago: undiagnosed ADHD.

    You're only marginally better than Mazulu. I've told you twice now that people who say stupid things are not necessarily lying. They often believe they're true. There are lots of people who hear voices that aren't there. There are lots of people who have random ideas pop into their head which they honestly think are the result of some supernatural event because they FEEL so real.

    We know that some people hear voices in their heads that tell them to go out and kill people. Fortunately not all of those voices are quite so homicidal.

    Do you think all the people who say they KNOW that God and Jesus are real are lying?

    Last time somebody did the tally, the average age of our members was 17. And for many of them I'm sure their emotional maturity lags just a tiny bit behind their intellectual maturity.

    Actually it was simpler than that. The transportation technologies developed in the Bronze Age (the wheel, fast-moving domesticated riding and draft animals, roads, ships capable of long voyages, etc.) allowed people to travel longer distances than their ancestors. As they traveled north or south, they couldn't help noticing that the stars weren't in quite the same place. By golly, it was as though they were seeing them from a different angle!

    It was explorers who figured this out, not scholars.

    Contrary to urban legend, in Columbus's time every sailor knew that the Earth was round. Long before his time the Greeks had even come up with a pretty decent estimate of its circumference. Columbus was actually an incompetent captain who didn't get the numbers right. Otherwise he would have known that Hispaniola was several thousand miles too close to be India. It's a good thing Hispaniola was there: he hadn't brought anywhere near enough food and other supplies to actually make the voyage to India. They would have all starved!
     
  18. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    Gee, thanks. I bow to the master.

    So what? I told you I don't agree with your assessment. Deal with it. These folks are bald faced liars, that is a fact.

    Of course, they're lying. They can't even be honest with themselves let alone anyone else. Just because they're protected to be free to practice their faith doesn't mean they're not lying about it. The fact that religions have been around for hundreds of years doesn't mean they're not a pack of lies, they are.
     
  19. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    It is I who bow to the master. People have told me that I'm the biggest cynic they've ever met. I pale in comparison.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Haven't people been interrogated about their so-called faith under polygraph? History says that a lot of them were tortured in ways that make waterboarding look like fraternity hazing. You'd think that more would have cracked.

    What's the purpose of crap like 9/11 if the perps don't really believe they're on their way to a date with 72 virgins?
     
  20. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    You tell me.

    Martyrdom, of course.
     
  21. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Consciousness is material too. It has to be, because it effects material objects.
     
  22. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Doesn't mean you still aren't full of --it. Lack of knowledge isn't a reason to believe in things without evidence.
     
  23. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Consciousness is information, channeled through a thinking system of sufficient complexity to be aware of itself.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page