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.
to have experienced things
How can I possibly call that subjective.
The Higgs boson is often referred to as "the God particle" by the media, after the title of Leon Lederman's book, The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?
While use of this term may have contributed to increased media interest in particle physics and the Large Hadron Collider, many scientists dislike it, since it overstates the particle's importance, not least since its discovery would still leave unanswered questions about the unification of QCD, the Electroweak interaction and gravity, and the ultimate origin of the universe.
In a renaming competition, a jury of physicists chose the name "the champagne bottle boson" as the best popular name.
Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by randyvs
I have now reread 'the previous post' and will try to answer it in normalese.
You say, we need to fill the emptiness of cosmos. No objections, if you don't like emptiness. But to fill that emptiness out with a speculated 'god' is just guesssing.
Furthermore you don't seem to distinguish between scientistist etc, saying there IS absolutely NO 'god' at all, and those who say, there's no evidence of a 'god', so the question is open for the duration.
And then ofcourse 'god' needs to be better defined, if 'everybody' are to be included in the argument.
And PS: Quantum-religions are bosh. Quantum-speculations are speculations and MAY be useful later. Or may not.
edit on 6-6-2011 by bogomil because: typo
Feel free to skidaddle, without being accused of a disappearance act. It's getting night here anyway
So am I understanding what you're saying is the" Higgs Boson "and the "God particle " are one and the same ?
The study that focuses on deities is called "Philosophy" and the first recorded atheists are Greek philosophers (not Greek scientists.) Socrates (a philosopher, not a scientist) was the person on record to be tried on the charge of atheism -- and yet I don't see you denouncing philosophy
Anyone can edit the material there
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Byrd
I respect your opinions sir, but should we be linking Wikipedia?
Anyone can edit the material there.
Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by Byrd
The study that focuses on deities is called "Philosophy" and the first recorded atheists are Greek philosophers (not Greek scientists.) Socrates (a philosopher, not a scientist) was the person on record to be tried on the charge of atheism -- and yet I don't see you denouncing philosophy
All right Byrd. I absolutely reject the last part of this section of your response. If I came off in my OP as if I were
denouncing science, I'm sure someone in the crowd I've attracted, would've jumped my excrement right off the bat.
I certainly would never even try to sound as if I were bold enough to denounce neither science or philosophy. I have a high school education Byrd. I can only sit in awe of the brains involved just at this site alone.
Remember how I spelled thermaldynamics ?
As I said earlier it's mostly those that are invlved in the fields of brain stem research and cloning that seem to attack and there are many on these boards as well so.
The thing about Byrd is he would prolly know if it was wrongly edited.edit on 6-6-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)edit on 6-6-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)
I have to wonder why this is such an obsession with some scientists ? They seem driven/determined that religion
steps on the toes of science.
Religion being from man
I have no problem with religion being excluded from society. But only if all religion is excluded. Satan worship being amoung them.
Yet scientists persist and many go off the deep end to endeavor, that God doesn't exist at all.
I think that is an extrordinary claim. I believe anyone making such a claim must first possess full knowledge of the universe. With out it, how can one decide what does and does not exist ?
So science from many directions, is desperate to prove God does not exist and should never be considered apart of any equasion.
Gods existence is simply THE greatest existence.
In fact there simply must be an existence that owns existence.
I would rather serve a benevolent, all knowing, righteous, all powerful, loving God.
And how far have they come really?
Have they come any closer to proving anything about the existance of God being a negative?
Many scientists use many avenues trying to prove or at least to make us believe God is a myth.
I'm o the notion science goes nowhere without God.
The vast majority of scientists simply do not care nor conduct their researches in their perspective fields with any deity in mind., be they religious or not.
Originally posted by Itisnowagain
Science does not and can not exclude God.
Are they not looking for the God particle?
It is something scientists have 'Faith' that they will find. They have even named this make believe (tooth fairy), the Higgs Boson!!!!edit on 6-6-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by sirnex
The vast majority of scientists simply do not care nor conduct their researches in their perspective fields with any deity in mind., be they religious or not.
Do you speak on behalf of the majority of all the scientists?
I just wonder how you know what each one of them believe. Have they told you?
Work is one thing, belief is something else.