It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: chr0naut
The zeroth Law of Thermodynamics is: "If two systems are in thermal equilibrium with a third system, they are in thermal equilibrium with each other". We have never observed any exceptions to this rule and cannot concieve of how an exception might occur. So a valid alternate thesis cannot be proposed and this means that we cannot "falsify" the theory - we cannot test its validity against an alternate. Because we cannot empirically test this theory, it is an assumption.
The first Law of Thermodynamics is: "When energy passes, as work, as heat, or with matter, into or out from a system, the system's internal energy changes in accord with the law of conservation of energy". Again, no antithesis can be proposed. As it is unfalsifiable, it is therefore untestable in that regard and, therefore, an assumption.
originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
Here's my scientific theory...
If you release a bowling ball from a height it will always drop.
originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
originally posted by: chr0naut
The zeroth Law of Thermodynamics is: "If two systems are in thermal equilibrium with a third system, they are in thermal equilibrium with each other". We have never observed any exceptions to this rule and cannot concieve of how an exception might occur. So a valid alternate thesis cannot be proposed and this means that we cannot "falsify" the theory - we cannot test its validity against an alternate. Because we cannot empirically test this theory, it is an assumption.
The first Law of Thermodynamics is: "When energy passes, as work, as heat, or with matter, into or out from a system, the system's internal energy changes in accord with the law of conservation of energy". Again, no antithesis can be proposed. As it is unfalsifiable, it is therefore untestable in that regard and, therefore, an assumption.
I'm not sure if unfalsifiable is correctly used here.
It's a clever bit of wordplay however.
Here's my scientific theory...
If you release a bowling ball from a height it will always drop.
Because it always happens doesn't make it unfalsifiable.
It just makes it unfalsified, there's a very big difference.
originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
a reply to: chr0naut
Until then what?
How many times do I have to drop a bowling ball before it's not an unscientific assumption to say it will fall.
originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness
Would you be comfortable walking into my Kilo lab, being handed a set of instructions and using any of the following chemicals, used to make pharmaceuticals, then take said pharmacutical you had made?
The chemicals are:
Phosgene
Methyl Iodide
Hydroflouric acid
A solublized palladium catalyst
originally posted by: BigBrotherDarkness
originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness
Would you be comfortable walking into my Kilo lab, being handed a set of instructions and using any of the following chemicals, used to make pharmaceuticals, then take said pharmacutical you had made?
The chemicals are:
Phosgene
Methyl Iodide
Hydroflouric acid
A solublized palladium catalyst
Ok I have time for your game and I haven't cheated nor will but run you through my process of thought as I do it...
Phosgene; the root is phosporus and well gene is a coding thats specific so we have a genome of phospher perhaps from an organism
Methyl Iodide; Methyl is a form of alcohol often used as a solvent and Iodide is related to iodine which comes from a turpine often used as a dye marker
Hydroflouric acid Hydroflouric acid well this one is a but easier as it is a strong acid that will disolve even bone... but is based off of flourine which is a gas
A solublized palladium catalyst ok solublized just mean pre disolved and palladium is a metal and a very precious one at that cost wise and happens to be an element on the periodic table... obviously not a salt of it from the solublized
Ok so we have a phosphorus gene an alcohol dye a corrosive acid and predisolved precious metal likely just powdered form. Phosphorus has the property to glow the dye the propety to stain and the acid to nom nom nom and a metal powder.
So what could this witches brew make? Well the acid and metal would go into a reaction the alcohol dye could be used as an activator or neutralyser and well a bioluminous phosphor.
You didn;t say any of the amounts which is very important btw or else we'd get a slurry of acid cause that could be like 500 gallons or litres if you prefer metric no i obvioulsy didn't convert and the predisolved metal could be a picogram so yeah nothing is what this would make without proper measurement of the ingredients...
So lets rationalize them into the acid making a paste out of the metal the alocol iodine as an adhesive to bond the paste when dry and the biolumanence added so this paste not only is metal but adheres and also glows under cetain conditions.
Other than something that would be painted on to be reactive to a certain type of light or perhaps even glow in the dark? Since you said a pharmaceutical; I would say a dye used that one consumes so that a part of the body could be seen properly in an imaging machine and that's my honest guess... but I honestly dont know but that is my best "uneducated" guess.
I certinaly wouldn't want to drink it to be honest if that's what it is.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
a reply to: chr0naut
Until then what?
How many times do I have to drop a bowling ball before it's not an unscientific assumption to say it will fall.
Never, because we already know of situations where the bowling ball will float.
The zeroth Law of Thermodynamics is: "If two systems are in thermal equilibrium with a third system, they are in thermal equilibrium with each other". We have never observed any exceptions to this rule and cannot concieve of how an exception might occur. So a valid alternate thesis cannot be proposed and this means that we cannot "falsify" the theory - we cannot test its validity against an alternate. Because we cannot empirically test this theory, it is an assumption.
The first Law of Thermodynamics is: "When energy passes, as work, as heat, or with matter, into or out from a system, the system's internal energy changes in accord with the law of conservation of energy". Again, no antithesis can be proposed. As it is unfalsifiable, it is therefore untestable in that regard and, therefore, an assumption.
originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
a reply to: chr0naut
The implication that you can't prove something to be true until there's an example of it not being true is paradoxical.
originally posted by: chr0naut
That still leaves two fundamental and foundational "laws" which are assumptive.
But I'm sure you know that and were just trolling.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: SLAYER69
This is why I consider suicide an even FAR greater sin among atheists than Christians. At least Christians still live on to be punished for it in hell. If you are believer of atheism then you believe this is the only chance you'll get, thus you should make it want to count. Ending it early isn't "making it count."
originally posted by: Char-Lee
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: SLAYER69
This is why I consider suicide an even FAR greater sin among atheists than Christians. At least Christians still live on to be punished for it in hell. If you are believer of atheism then you believe this is the only chance you'll get, thus you should make it want to count. Ending it early isn't "making it count."
It is possible that a suicide has to come back and rinse/repeat until they finish this life appropriately. To move on maybe to the next learning life.
Hell is the grave not many people believe in a fiery torture place.
originally posted by: TzarChasm
originally posted by: Char-Lee
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: SLAYER69
This is why I consider suicide an even FAR greater sin among atheists than Christians. At least Christians still live on to be punished for it in hell. If you are believer of atheism then you believe this is the only chance you'll get, thus you should make it want to count. Ending it early isn't "making it count."
It is possible that a suicide has to come back and rinse/repeat until they finish this life appropriately. To move on maybe to the next learning life.
Hell is the grave not many people believe in a fiery torture place.
because there is no support for it in scripture or because it is difficult to reconcile the pope with guantanamo bay? (allegorically speaking)
originally posted by: Char-Lee
originally posted by: TzarChasm
originally posted by: Char-Lee
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: SLAYER69
This is why I consider suicide an even FAR greater sin among atheists than Christians. At least Christians still live on to be punished for it in hell. If you are believer of atheism then you believe this is the only chance you'll get, thus you should make it want to count. Ending it early isn't "making it count."
It is possible that a suicide has to come back and rinse/repeat until they finish this life appropriately. To move on maybe to the next learning life.
Hell is the grave not many people believe in a fiery torture place.
because there is no support for it in scripture or because it is difficult to reconcile the pope with guantanamo bay? (allegorically speaking)
:-) I can't see anyone who has children thinking their "Father" would place them in eternal torture no matter how bad they had behaved. I could be wrong about what most Christians believe i guess many do believe in a literal torture forever place. How sad.