| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Padraic 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
 Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:39 |
 BaldFriede wrote:
By the way: I always find it amazing that all physicists accept that matter bends space but no-one ever asked "which way"? It would be the first question I would ask.
|
riemannian manifolds
|
 |
Chris S
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 09 2004
Location: Front Range
Status: Offline
Points: 7028
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:41 |
|
Fun reading......off to have some of Alan's psychedlic breakfast.
|
|
<font color=Brown>Music - The Sound Librarian
...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR]
|
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:50 |
Tony R wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
By the way: I always find it amazing that all physicists accept that matter bends space but no-one ever asked "which way"? It would be the first question I would ask.
|
That's the most stupidly presumptive and arrogant thing you've ever written, and that is definitely saying something!
All physicists accept matter bends space and no-one ever ask why
Grow up.
|
That was unnecessarily harsh and undignified for an admin...
|
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:50 |
Slartibartfast wrote:
Tony R wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
By the way: I always find it amazing that all physicists accept that matter bends space but no-one ever asked "which way"? It would be the first question I would ask.
|
That's the most stupidly presumptive and arrogant thing you've ever written, and that is definitely saying something!
All physicists accept matter bends space and no-one ever ask why
Grow up.
|
That was unnecessarily harsh and undignified for an admin...
|
Couldn't agree more. Very surprising.
|
|
Icarium
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34076
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:50 |
i think black matter is quite facinating, and to think that it is EVERY WHERE around uss and that it goes through our boddie without we feels it is quite  .
ohjey
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:50 |
Slartibartfast wrote:
Tony R wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
By the way: I always find it amazing that all physicists accept that matter bends space but no-one ever asked "which way"? It would be the first question I would ask.
|
That's the most stupidly presumptive and arrogant thing you've ever written, and that is definitely saying something!
All physicists accept matter bends space and no-one ever ask why
Grow up.
|
That was unnecessarily harsh and undignified for an admin...
|
You're right. Enough of this silliness.
Edited by Tony R - July 22 2010 at 14:52
|
|
BaldFriede
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 02 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 10266
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:52 |
Padraic wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
By the way: I always find it amazing that all physicists accept that matter bends space but no-one ever asked "which way"? It would be the first question I would ask.
|
riemannian manifolds |
That is not the question I have. Let me go down one dimension. We have a horizontal plain and bend it in the third dimension. But we have two ways of doing that: Up or down. Now let's get back to the third dimension. We have a space which is built like a cuboid. Now matter comes and bends it. But there are two directions it can be bent in, let's call them "doo" and "uwn". Now which way does matter bend it? Can it be that the difference between matter and antimatter simply is the way they bend space?
|
 BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
|
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:53 |
BaldFriede wrote:
Padraic wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
By the way: I always find it amazing that all physicists accept that matter bends space but no-one ever asked "which way"? It would be the first question I would ask.
|
riemannian manifolds |
That is not the question I have. Let me go down one dimension. We have a horizontal plain and bend it in the third dimension. But we have two ways of doing that: Up or down.
Now let's get back to the third dimension. We have a space which is built like a cuboid. Now matter comes and bends it. But there are two directions it can be bent in, let's call them "doo" and "uwn". Now which way does matter bend it? Can it be that the difference between matter and antimatter simply is the way they bend space?
|
Beats the hell out of me - I'm not an astrophysicist and my math knowledge in that particular area is quite limited.
|
|
BaldFriede
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 02 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 10266
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:53 |
|
|
BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:54 |
|
You're right. I am projecting.
|
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:54 |
BaldFriede wrote:
Mr ProgFreak wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
Another thing I find funny is that from the fact there are contradictions in the bible Mike concludes that it can used to prove anything. Imagine a book in which a bunch of top scientists who have different opinions on a certain matter all explained their positions in a single book. That book would be full of contradictions. But would it really be useless, as Mike claims the bible is?
|
My notion that the bible can be used to prove anything doesn't solely rely on the contradictions which the book inarguably contains. There's also the fact that it was written in a society that was very different from our society today, in an ancient language. There are simply so many ways to interpret the verses, and the contradictions make it particularly easy to support completely contradictory claims on the same book.
Seriously, will you keep building facile analogies? There must be ways for you to make better use of your spare time.
|
it is you who calls the analogy "facile", hence it must be,. No-one doubts the bible was written in a different society, But that was not your argument, Mike. You mentioned Ehrman and that he found contradictions in the book, and you pointed out what an expert he is, so I thought that this was of some importance to your argument. If it now turns out that it isn't I of course retract my comment.
|
Of course it's a major factor, but that doesn't mean that it's necessarily the only one. And yes, I mentioned Ehrman, but it's not like he focuses solely on contradictions between verses. Why do you always alternate between extremes? 0% and 100%, and nothing in between ...
|
|
Icarium
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34076
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:55 |
hmm maybe some astrophysicians are members in PA but are not very active, I bet my right ear wax, that their are some physicians on this archives that can answer that. just to find them between the 28.877 members here 
|
|
Trademark
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 21 2006
Location: oHIo
Status: Offline
Points: 1009
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:56 |
|
|
|
BaldFriede
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 02 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 10266
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:56 |
Mr ProgFreak wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
Mr ProgFreak wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
Another thing I find funny is that from the fact there are contradictions in the bible Mike concludes that it can used to prove anything. Imagine a book in which a bunch of top scientists who have different opinions on a certain matter all explained their positions in a single book. That book would be full of contradictions. But would it really be useless, as Mike claims the bible is?
|
My notion that the bible can be used to prove anything doesn't solely rely on the contradictions which the book inarguably contains. There's also the fact that it was written in a society that was very different from our society today, in an ancient language. There are simply so many ways to interpret the verses, and the contradictions make it particularly easy to support completely contradictory claims on the same book.
Seriously, will you keep building facile analogies? There must be ways for you to make better use of your spare time.
|
it is you who calls the analogy "facile", hence it must be,. No-one doubts the bible was written in a different society, But that was not your argument, Mike. You mentioned Ehrman and that he found contradictions in the book, and you pointed out what an expert he is, so I thought that this was of some importance to your argument. If it now turns out that it isn't I of course retract my comment.
|
Of course it's a major factor, but that doesn't mean that it's necessarily the only one. And yes, I mentioned Ehrman, but it's not like he focuses solely on contradictions between verses.
Why do you always alternate between extremes? 0% and 100%, and nothing in between ...
|
Excuse me, but I always have that feeling with you. 
|
BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
|
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:57 |
aginor wrote:
hmm maybe some astrophysicians are members in PA but are not very active, I bet my right ear wax, that their are some physicians on this archives that can answer that. just to find them between the 28.877 members here |
physicists.
physicians are doctors.
|
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 14:59 |
|
|
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
|
Icarium
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34076
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 15:01 |
Padraic wrote:
aginor wrote:
hmm maybe some astrophysicists are members in PA but are not very active, I bet my right ear wax, that their are some physicist on this archives that can answer that. just to find them between the 28.877 members here |
physicists.
physicians are doctors. |
okey thanks 
|
|
Trademark
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 21 2006
Location: oHIo
Status: Offline
Points: 1009
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 15:04 |
|
astrophysicians: Doctors to the stars
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 15:18 |
Tony R wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
Another thing I find funny is that from the fact there are contradictions in the bible Mike concludes that it can used to prove anything. Imagine a book in which a bunch of top scientists who have different opinions on a certain matter all explained their positions in a single book. That book would be full of contradictions. But would it really be useless, as Mike claims the bible is?
|
Well it is claimed that The Bible is the unerring word of God. That leaves no room for error. No matter how much the Christians etc wriggle around this with their fudges an omniscient God cannot make mistakes.
|
Not exactly or completely to be accurate:
|
THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true.
]We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision,” they say in The Gift of Scripture.
The document is timely, coming as it does amid the rise of the religious Right, in particular in the US.
Some Christians want a literal interpretation of the story of creation, as told in Genesis, taught alongside Darwin’s theory of evolution in schools, believing “intelligent design” to be an equally plausible theory of how the world began.
But the first 11 chapters of Genesis, in which two different and at times conflicting stories of creation are told, are among those that this country’s Catholic bishops insist cannot be “historical”. At most, they say, they may contain “historical traces”.
....
They say the Church must offer the gospel in ways “appropriate to changing times, intelligible and attractive to our contemporaries”.
The Bible is true in passages relating to human salvation, they say, but continue: “We should not expect total accuracy from the Bible in other, secular matters.”
They go on to condemn fundamentalism for its “intransigent intolerance” and to warn of “significant dangers” involved in a fundamentalist approach.
“Such an approach is dangerous, for example, when people of one nation or group see in the Bible a mandate for their own superiority, and even consider themselves permitted by the Bible to use violence against others.”
|
It's clear, not all the Bible is liteally the word of God, it's inspired by God, may have traces of truth, but must not be understood literally.
Iván
Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 22 2010 at 15:19
|
|
|
|
CPicard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10841
|
Posted: July 22 2010 at 15:24 |
|
Traduttore, tradittore.
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Theism vs. Atheism ... will it ever be settled?
