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.

 

It just doesn't happen

page: 23
23
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 07:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Xtrozero

The word law means nothing in this case



It does though. Predictable patterns in physics are called laws because they are defined as a system of rules. Rules require something intelligent to enact them, especially if they are upholding intelligent life.


Wrong (again). The laws of physics are derived based on empirical observation by MAN, not the creature from the Blue Lagoon. In physics, and all science for that matter, empirical observation is conducted through repeated experiment. When results replicate, they fall into a classification. If the original question is big enough, like the laws of thermodynamics, they are classified as "laws".

The laws of physics are convenient to managing our world. But they are not necessarily ubiquitous throughout the universe.

P.S. Where's that probability calculation??? Hint: Bayes' Theorem

edit on 3-9-2020 by Phantom423 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 08:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Phantom423

If the fundamental constants depend on where in the universe we are, like for instance the so-called fine structure constant, then the basic assumption that the laws of physics are the same everywhere in the universe is right out the window.

So there goes as above so below for a start.

This is all to do with the spectrum of the light being missing wavelengths that reach us from Quasars, and the way we measure the fine-structure constant from the data is it not?
edit on 3-9-2020 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

You wrote of water freezing at 32 degrees F' like design
suggests it's something other than temperature. Well
why isn't water frozen all the time? Why aren't we frozen
all the time? How did life start in hostile environment with
no laboratory?

And no scientist tinkering and manipulating and over seeing a
synthesis? Going back and starting over when they get it wrong.
How does evolution do that? I guess evolution just got it right the
first time. Why aren't scientists as intelligent as evolution? Cheese
and rice they already have a model to go by. Random chance didn't
need one? TF you say?

Surely evolution wasn't able to tinker until evolution got it right?
Abiogenesis macro micro who cares. The fact is what science is
push'n is crazy. To suggest that the timing and countless examples
of precision to the power of infinity. All for us to marvel at how it
ALLOWS our existence. To suggest it all isn't a phenomenal act with
a purpose? Is completely ludicrous. One lava flow over your primordial
soup and guess what? No dinner for you young man. But wait random
chance can find another puddle of mud hopefully in another billion
years. But that can't happen now because were already here.
I start think'n about this stuff and it drives me nuts it's so stupid.

How in the hell are we not on mars instead of earth. Mars
has water and lightening? ou. " We don't have all the answers
yet but we will". No you won't. Because there's knowledge out there
that's not in our neighborhood. But I say there is no knowledge that
isn't known. To suggest that intelligence springs up by itself from mud
for just no freak'n reason at all. Is just the newest kind of stupid on the
block. Mud doesn't seem like a very good retainer for information to
be handed down.

I think you people belong on mars where all you have to look at is rust.
Because you sure aren't very thankful for the majesty and and the beauty
that was put out there as well as right here for our observance. And my
use of the word intelligent was very loose in regards to science and man.

We threaten our own existence on this beautiful Earth because we lack
guidance. Not real intelligent when you consider our options for residence.
No way are we go'n any where else ever. And I think I even understand
exactly why the universe is expanding. Because it's trying to get the hell
away from us. What I see when I open my eyes every morning is something
sacred. That we have been ALLOWED to witness. Maybe we should be
spending a lot more time being thankful for it.

Instead of teaching abortion and literally destroying the only home we
have to give to the future. Ignoring that the design has a Designer makes
it all okay doesn't it? But all things do have an end. Ages pass and this
one is no different. No catastrophe from God will even be needed. Just
let us go long enough. And we'll see ourselves right out the door. Not to
bright if you ask me.

What are we gonna do once we made this place inhospitable to life.

Blame God for that too.

edit on 3-9-2020 by carsforkids because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Phantom423

If the fundamental constants depend on where in the universe we are, like for instance the so-called fine structure constant, then the basic assumption that the laws of physics are the same everywhere in the universe is right out the window.

So there goes as above so below for a start.

This is all to do with the spectrum of the light being missing wavelengths that reach us from Quasars, and the way we measure the fine-structure constant from the data is it not?


The fine structure constant was developed to extend the Bohr model. It is dimensionless. So when you say "measure", you're not measuring anything in terms of units. In practice, it can be used to measure the energy needed to overcome electrostatic repulsion between two electrons. Is the constant the same in the entire universe? We don't know.



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Phantom423

I suppose the real question is, if there is any variation, what causes such?

And if the fine-structure constant turns out to be mutable, then what about the other 25 dimensionless constants we use to describe our universe?

We certainly live in very interesting times.
edit on 3-9-2020 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Phantom423

I suppose the real question is, if there is any variation, what causes such?

And if the fine-structure constant turns out to be mutable, then what about the other 25 dimensionless constants we use to describe our universe?

We certainly live in very interesting times.


Constants can be in dispute. The Hubble constant is an example:



Day three brought two new measurements of the Hubble constant: A cosmic distance ladder calibrated with “Mira” stars gave 73.6, and galactic surface brightness fluctuations gave 76.5, both plus or minus four. Adam Riess took more photos, and by the end of the day a plot had been created reflecting all the existing measurements.


www.theatlantic.com...



How a Dispute over a Single Number Became a Cosmological Crisis
Two divergent measurements of how fast the universe is expanding cannot both be right. Something must give—but what?


www.scientificamerican.com...

That doesn't throw everything we know out the window. It just says that new instrumentation, new ideas can alter what we think we know. There are no absolutes here. Many "constants" are just gross generalities so that we're able to work with the data.



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 10:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: TzarChasm

Hawthorn fly (is an example of evolution)




Hawthorn flies "evolving" into an apple fly is one of your example of evolution^? It's the same exact fly. They didn't even change it's species name. Just because it eats something different doesn't mean it evolved. The rest of your examples are also an organism staying as the same organism:




Tennessee cave salamanders


They're still salamanders...


Greenish Warbler


Warblers becoming warblers. That's not evolution.



Larus gulls

They're still gulls.



Drosophila


Which remained Drosophila (fruit fly)




Finches


Which remained finches.


There are no examples of organisms evolving into another distinctly different organisms. Fruit flies remain fruit flies, gulls remain gulls, salamanders remain salamanders. Unless you can find an actual example of a population of organisms changing into something else, then you cannot attribute the diversity of species to evolutionary theory. Seriously man, it's one of the biggest lie we have been told growing up and there's no substantial evidence to show it is remotely possible.


You obviously still don't understand how evolution works.


Nineteenth-century English social scientist Herbert Spencer made this prescient observation: "Those who cavalierly reject the Theory of Evolution, as not adequately supported by facts, seem quite to forget that their own theory is supported by no facts at all." Well over a century later nothing has changed. When I debate creationists, they present not one fact in favor of creation and instead demand "just one transitional fossil" that proves evolution. When I do offer evidence (for example, Ambulocetus natans, a transitional fossil between ancient land mammals and modern whales), they respond that there are now two gaps in the fossil record.

This is a clever debate retort, but it reveals a profound error that I call the Fossil Fallacy: the belief that a "single fossil"--one bit of data--constitutes proof of a multifarious process or historical sequence. In fact, proof is derived through a convergence of evidence from numerous lines of inquiry--multiple, independent inductions, all of which point to an unmistakable conclusion.

We know evolution happened not because of transitional fossils such as A. natans but because of the convergence of evidence from such diverse fields as geology, paleontology, biogeography, comparative anatomy and physiology, molecular biology, genetics, and many more. No single discovery from any of these fields denotes proof of evolution, but together they reveal that life evolved in a certain sequence by a particular process.




www.scientificamerican.com...

edit on 3-9-2020 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Phantom423

That's the conundrum really, we get to work with the information we have available.

Information that we can detect and then refine results to produce data we can work with, thus breed further queries and questions.

Science!

If there are absolutes in this verse we certainly will never know for sure unless we manage to get out there amongst the stars to measure and catalog the place.

Our universe is simply far too vast to merely speculate from afar.
edit on 3-9-2020 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Phantom423

That's the conundrum really, we get to work with the information we have available.

Information that we can detect and then refine results to produce data we can work with, thus breed further queries and questions.

Science!

If there are absolutes in this verse we certainly will never know for sure unless we manage to get out there amongst the stars to measure and catalog the place.

Our universe is simply far too vast to merely speculate from afar.


One thing in our favor. Humans have a lot of ingenuity. What we can't do organically, we design and implement.

The new WEBB telescope is a perfect example - when it comes online it will produce a tremendous amount of new data that will take years to analyze. Humans are very capable of solving problems. It's an evolutionary gift that keeps on giving and getting better.

The new WEBB: www.jwst.nasa.gov...



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Phantom423

Yes, we do tend to adapt and overcome most obstacles.

I don't think we are really designed for space travel all the same.

Long term, we are either going to have to learn to build a better Human or manage to explore the universe via AI and robotic means.

That new telescope is indeed a perfect example of what we can produce.

Be nice once they manage to get off there arse and put it up there all the same considering the information the likes of Hubble has given us.
edit on 3-9-2020 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

It does though. Predictable patterns in physics are called laws because they are defined as a system of rules. Rules require something intelligent to enact them, especially if they are upholding intelligent life.


Rules and laws are human constructs...its not like a God said I need to make some laws and so man said these are God's laws...lol

We can also just say the natural forces of the universe... Does the wind need God to blow? An apple falls out of a tree and hits you in the head did God do it? A giant asteroid hits the earth and resets life does that need to be God's work? About every 70 million years a really big one comes along and we are due.



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero




An apple falls out of a tree and hits you in the head did God do it?


Nope it was Randy Newberry from my neighborhood. That actually
happened to me once. We fought all the time lol



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phantom423
Where's that probability calculation???


Intelligible systems are more likely to come from an intelligent source, rather than an unintelligent source.

Yes or no?
edit on 3-9-2020 by cooperton because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: cooperton

"One must face chaos to give birth to a star" Thus Spoke Zarathustra.


Seems to me where chaos begins, our classical understanding of science stops.


edit on 3-9-2020 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: carsforkids

You wrote of water freezing at 32 degrees F' like design
suggests it's something other than temperature. Well
why isn't water frozen all the time? Why aren't we frozen
all the time? How did life start in hostile environment with
no laboratory?


Whether water freezes or not in the end it would be something right? Our something just happens to be 32F. It looks like life starts when conditions are right, so that is also just a natural chemical process in a reaction to the environment around it. Life is only special because we say it is special and that doesn't make it special. It seems to be just a normal process within our universe...Life happens when conditions are right...or in other words chemical reactions happen when conditions are right.



And no scientist tinkering and manipulating and over seeing a
synthesis? Going back and starting over when they get it wrong.
How does evolution do that? I guess evolution just got it right the
first time. Why aren't scientists as intelligent as evolution? Cheese
and rice they already have a model to go by. Random chance didn't
need one? TF you say?


Who needs to tinker..life can go in a infinite number of directions..there has been trillions of different lifeforms on planet earth alone, so God tinkered with each one of them? If so he really likes beetles since there are 360,000 species of them.

Got what right? Earth has reset life a number of times knocking it right back to basically one cell organisms and it still grows in unlimited directions. It is what this chemical reaction we call life does...

As far as intelligence that was caused by an arms race. For billions of years life on earth was basically stagnated and then one simple life form evolved into eating another life form as food and the massive arms race between predator and prey started. That turned into an explosion of life in many directions and growth with evolution on steroids making predators better to eat and then making prey better to defend. Somewhere intelligence was a good evolutionary trait for predators to hunt and that was evolved too.



Surely evolution wasn't able to tinker until evolution got it right?


There is no right or wrong as you think here. Right is when a species has babies and new traits good for that species are carried forward, wrong is a species dies out instead. How many species have died out on earth..Trillions?



Abiogenesis macro micro who cares. The fact is what science is
push'n is crazy. To suggest that the timing and countless examples
of precision to the power of infinity. All for us to marvel at how it
ALLOWS our existence. To suggest it all isn't a phenomenal act with
a purpose? Is completely ludicrous. One lava flow over your primordial
soup and guess what? No dinner for you young man. But wait random
chance can find another puddle of mud hopefully in another billion
years. But that can't happen now because were already here.
I start think'n about this stuff and it drives me nuts it's so stupid.


Well we will see when we find micro life on some of the moons in our solar system. We have already detected heat, water in liquid form and organic chemicals...so I guess we will see if life just happens when you throw in these ingredients over billions of years, or if it takes a magic wand from God to happen.



How in the hell are we not on mars instead of earth. Mars
has water and lightening? ou. " We don't have all the answers
yet but we will". No you won't. Because there's knowledge out there
that's not in our neighborhood. But I say there is no knowledge that
isn't known. To suggest that intelligence springs up by itself from mud
for just no freak'n reason at all. Is just the newest kind of stupid on the
block. Mud doesn't seem like a very good retainer for information to
be handed down.


Mars core harden billion of years ago and so all the water and air has mostly bled off, but we will most likely still find life there. Venus is interesting. It is closer to earth, but it has evolved into a massive greenhouse planet with a surface temperature of 600F, but I bet underground there is life of some kind. Heat plus water plus organic chemicals kind of equals life...

I think life in general is very common in the universe, but advance life as we see on earth is rare just due to the fact the more advance life becomes it seems the more vulnerable to its environment it becomes. Earth has reset life at least 5 times, 600 million years ago was snowball earth with almost all life wiped out...a few 100 million years later after earth went back to warmer temps we get a massive life explosion of the dinosaurs. Then they are basically wiped and mammals were allowed to grow to replace them, so what will be the next thing to replace us if Yellow Stone blows or another life killing asteroid hits.



We threaten our own existence on this beautiful Earth because we lack
guidance. Not real intelligent when you consider our options for residence.
No way are we go'n any where else ever. And I think I even understand
exactly why the universe is expanding. Because it's trying to get the hell
away from us. What I see when I open my eyes every morning is something
sacred. That we have been ALLOWED to witness. Maybe we should be
spending a lot more time being thankful for it.


Trillions of species have come and gone..that is a normal cycle of life... Humans will one day go too in that cycle...I think the end result of intelligence as we have it is AI that moves forward outside the boundaries of evolution. In a billion years we could have AI roaming the universe sending information back to a race long dead...



edit on 3-9-2020 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero




Whether water freezes or not in the end it would be something right? Our something just happens to be 32F. It looks like life starts when conditions are right, so that is also just a natural chemical process in a reaction to the environment around it. Life is only special because we say it is special and that doesn't make it special. It seems to be just a normal process within our universe...Life happens when conditions are right...or in other words chemical reactions happen when conditions are right.


You know what's funny is I'm just gonna say it myself this time.
You might as well be talking to a wall. I just can't for the life of
me see how what you're saying is considered to be more credible
by anyone. I'm sorry man I even tried to see any kind of opening
a ray of light or something. I wish I could but I don't see it.



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 01:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Phantom423
Where's that probability calculation???


Intelligible systems are more likely to come from an intelligent source, rather than an unintelligent source.

Yes or no?


Nature is not an intelligent system. It doesn't think and make decisions. It self assembles by well researched mechanisms.
No creature from the Blue Lagoon required.

Where's your probability calculation? Can't do it?



edit on 3-9-2020 by Phantom423 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 01:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: carsforkids

You know what's funny is I'm just gonna say it myself this time.
You might as well be talking to a wall. I just can't for the life of
me see how what you're saying is considered to be more credible
by anyone. I'm sorry man I even tried to see any kind of opening
a ray of light or something. I wish I could but I don't see it.



How is the statement.."I don't understand, so it must be God" any better? You know we have had 100s of Gods at one time for 100s of things we didn't understand what makes this God any different than the God of wind as example.

IDK if we can answer this today, but as we explore our other planets and moons and find life there in simple forms where we find water, heat and organic chemicals then maybe we can say that life is a natural process in our universe.

What part gets you the most as unbelievable to not have God working some magic? The initial start of life or how life evolves over time to more complex lifeforms that seem to get hit now and then back to basic life to start the process allover again where trillions of different lifeforms have come and gone..


edit on 3-9-2020 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero




What part gets you the most as unbelievable to not have God working some magic?


It would have to be the part where the magic happens without the wand.

Like Phantoms retort here.




Nature is not an intelligent system. It doesn't think and make decisions. It self assembles by well researched mechanisms.


Sounds like auto bots.


Everyone knows magic shows aren't really magic. They are clever intelligent
tricks by slight of hand. But they do not ever perform by themselves. So
every magic show has a magician or there be no show. As the audience we
can research and find out how each trick was performed. But that doesn't
by any means allow us to claim the tricks can perform by themselves.

That would be where the magic becomes real.
edit on 3-9-2020 by carsforkids because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2020 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: carsforkids

It would have to be the part where the magic happens without the wand.



Is it magic because within our limited understanding we think it is magic? As I said, with the rising of the sun everyday is that magic, or a God? Seems as we learn more and more...less and less Gods are needed until we get to the point of talking about what is outside of our universe and we fall back to God once again. Can you see a pattern here?

I always fall back to why is God needed? Doesn't mean there isn't one just that God is not really needed in the process and even if God created the universe the way life forms and things happen would still be the same way without God too. The only difference would be God mixing up a universe batch instead of random ingredients making a random universe with us being a random one among maybe an infinite number. Heat + Water+ organic chemicals would work the same in either cases, unless as I asked before do you feel God manipulates every subatomic particle in the universe for the life of it?




top topics



 
23
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join