Elen1107 Posted March 12, 2020 Share Posted March 12, 2020 (edited) 19 hours ago, thormas said: If we're talking about the conversation Rom and I are having: How is God measured, what possible measurement of God are there and what independent (of God?) observer has observed God in himself? I'm sorry, I thought you, or Burl, was referring to my last few posts and the conversation we were having there. What I was talking about is not necessarily a measurement of God. It's quantum level mathematics that tells the scientists that something like 98% of all matter and energy in the universe is invisible, that this energy and matter holds the universe together, that it can itself create what we know as matter, and that it must exist, or else the whole universe would come apart and would also not be there in the first place. A few people have stopped to speculate and ask if this might have something to do with God. Edited March 12, 2020 by Elen1107 added a few words to make things clearer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thormas Posted March 12, 2020 Share Posted March 12, 2020 1 hour ago, Elen1107 said: I'm sorry, I thought you, or Burl, was referring to my last few posts and the conversation we were having there. What I was talking about is not necessarily a measurement of God. It's quantum level mathematics that tells the scientists that something like 98% of all matter and energy in the universe is invisible, that this energy and matter holds the universe together, that it can itself create what we know as matter, and that it must exist, or else the whole universe would come apart and would also not be there in the first place. A few people have stopped to speculate and ask if this might have something to do with God. Still seems thought that the idea of God is that he is not energy or matter (dark or otherwise) rather God is the very possibility that there is energy/matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elen1107 Posted March 12, 2020 Share Posted March 12, 2020 2 minutes ago, thormas said: Still seems thought that the idea of God is that he is not energy or matter (dark or otherwise) rather God is the very possibility that there is energy/matter. Could God be both? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thormas Posted March 13, 2020 Share Posted March 13, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Elen1107 said: Could God be both? Not in my understanding but our differences are fine. Edited March 13, 2020 by thormas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burl Posted March 13, 2020 Share Posted March 13, 2020 3 hours ago, Elen1107 said: I'm sorry, I thought you, or Burl, was referring to my last few posts and the conversation we were having there. What I was talking about is not necessarily a measurement of God. It's quantum level mathematics that tells the scientists that something like 98% of all matter and energy in the universe is invisible, that this energy and matter holds the universe together, that it can itself create what we know as matter, and that it must exist, or else the whole universe would come apart and would also not be there in the first place. A few people have stopped to speculate and ask if this might have something to do with God. Sounds confusing to me. String theory has some obvious connections but I don’t understand that either. Back to the Gospels and Hebrews for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romansh Posted March 14, 2020 Author Share Posted March 14, 2020 On 3/11/2020 at 6:24 PM, Burl said: 3 criteria must be satisfied for something to be validly explored using the scientific method: 1) It must be measurable 2) It must be repeatable 3) It must be observed by an independent observer. Does it have to be measurable? Things like uncertainty principle would argue not. in that velocity and position cannot be measured simultaneously. There is nothing a priori that states that science has to be measurable. For example what is the is the measure of evolution or biology? Science can be purely descriptive. So in that sense something must be observable and not necessarily measurable. Yes repeatability is a bonus. But when we are talking about measurement, the limits of measurement are given. We look for precision and accuracy. Similarly independent observers are nice, but the fact that another observer is neither here nor there. If I happen to experience demons and you don't, does not make the study of the experience of demons any less scientifically valid. On 3/11/2020 at 6:24 PM, Burl said: Attempting a scientific observation of god is a fool’s errand. Is that like saying the scientific observation of god is a nonsense? I would agree especially if there is nothing to observe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romansh Posted March 14, 2020 Author Share Posted March 14, 2020 On 3/10/2020 at 1:14 PM, Elen1107 said: Scientist are currently talking about something called dark matter and dark energy. I myself might call this invisible matter and invisible energy, cause I don't like the word 'dark', but basically I think that we could be meaning and talking about, about the same thing. Two things here Elen: Firstly the dark matter and energy is a far from settled matter. There are competing hypotheses like MOND. Secondly, if dark matter and energy do exist they are observable through their interaction with the rest of the universe. So the terms visible and invisible are a little circumspect. For example microwaves are not visible in that we can only "see" them when they interact with other matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burl Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 38 minutes ago, romansh said: Does it have to be measurable? Things like uncertainty principle would argue not. in that velocity and position cannot be measured simultaneously. There is nothing a priori that states that science has to be measurable. For example what is the is the measure of evolution or biology? Science can be purely descriptive. So in that sense something must be observable and not necessarily measurable. Yes repeatability is a bonus. But when we are talking about measurement, the limits of measurement are given. We look for precision and accuracy. Similarly independent observers are nice, but the fact that another observer is neither here nor there. If I happen to experience demons and you don't, does not make the study of the experience of demons any less scientifically valid. Is that like saying the scientific observation of god is a nonsense? I would agree especially if there is nothing to observe. Quantifiability is a requirement for science. Yes, the scientific observation of god is not possible. You need logic & reason for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elen1107 Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 (edited) On 3/12/2020 at 10:24 PM, Burl said: Sounds confusing to me. String theory has some obvious connections but I don’t understand that either. Back to the Gospels and Hebrews for me. I, myself like string theory. I sometimes wonder if we can make our whole selves full of light and "vibrate" at a certain level, if that might be how eternity is achieved. Just saying 🙂 Edited March 14, 2020 by Elen1107 added " " s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elen1107 Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 9 hours ago, romansh said: Two things here Elen: Firstly the dark matter and energy is a far from settled matter. There are competing hypotheses like MOND. Secondly, if dark matter and energy do exist they are observable through their interaction with the rest of the universe. So the terms visible and invisible are a little circumspect. For example microwaves are not visible in that we can only "see" them when they interact with other matter. I'm thinking that invisible matter and energy is, while perhaps not a completely settled matter, is understood to be by many scientists and people in the field to be very true and very real, that is, almost completely decided upon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elen1107 Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 10 hours ago, romansh said: Similarly independent observers are nice, but the fact that another observer is neither here nor there. If I happen to experience demons and you don't, does not make the study of the experience of demons any less scientifically valid. If I experienced demons, I would tune them out and try really hard to focus on something else.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thormas Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 15 hours ago, romansh said: Similarly independent observers are nice, but the fact that another observer is neither here nor there. If I happen to experience demons and you don't, does not make the study of the experience of demons any less scientifically valid. Not only is there not 'another observer' of God, there was not and cannot be any observer of God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romansh Posted March 14, 2020 Author Share Posted March 14, 2020 14 hours ago, Burl said: Quantifiability is a requirement for science. So what is the quantity of evolution? I am not saying quantifiability does not help, but as a flat statement I can't help thinking it is flat out wrong. I gave this example already. 14 hours ago, Burl said: Yes, the scientific observation of god is not possible. Then it is quite possible god does not exist, and it should be considering it as a possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thormas Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 15 hours ago, romansh said: Did I miss it? Did you answer my question about me, about all of us being 'welcome' by you? Inquiring minds want to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romansh Posted March 14, 2020 Author Share Posted March 14, 2020 2 minutes ago, thormas said: Not only is there not 'another observer' of God, there was not and cannot be any observer of God. So you (or someone) has developed the concept of god from first principles? Some claim to experience god, this experience I count as observation, in the same way I experience being cold (regardless of my body temperature). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romansh Posted March 14, 2020 Author Share Posted March 14, 2020 5 minutes ago, thormas said: Did I miss it? Yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thormas Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 2 minutes ago, romansh said: Yes Could you point me to it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thormas Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 5 minutes ago, romansh said: Some claim to experience god, this experience I count as observation, in the same way I experience being cold (regardless of my body temperature). To 'experience' God, even to 'know' God (as has been discussed here) is not to have 'observed' God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romansh Posted March 14, 2020 Author Share Posted March 14, 2020 Just now, thormas said: Could you point me to it? I could … but in the past when I have made similar requests of you, you have brushed me off. Try the the thread where you asked the question Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thormas Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 Just now, romansh said: I could … but in the past when I have made similar requests of you, you have brushed me off. Try the the thread where you asked the question So I didn't miss it, got it. And could you tell me where those (other) requests of whether I welcomed you are so I can review. But even your response is not very welcoming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romansh Posted March 14, 2020 Author Share Posted March 14, 2020 3 minutes ago, thormas said: So I didn't miss it 😖 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burl Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 14 minutes ago, romansh said: So what is the quantity of evolution? I am not saying quantifiability does not help, but as a flat statement I can't help thinking it is flat out wrong. I gave this example already. Then it is quite possible god does not exist, and it should be considering it as a possibility. Darwin quantified evolution using the beak dimensions of various finches. Non-material things (including gods) are not suitable subjects for science. Pseudoscience, semi-science and social science often try, but there are always questionable assumptions involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thormas Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 10 minutes ago, romansh said: 😖 .........but it wasn't there to be missed........sadly we're in rom-typical mode yet again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romansh Posted March 14, 2020 Author Share Posted March 14, 2020 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Burl said: Darwin quantified evolution using the beak dimensions of various finches. I just strummed through my On the Origin … I did not see any table or graph (I was disappointed) And what I have read of On the origin I don't recall a single measurement being reported. Comparisons yes. 12 minutes ago, Burl said: Non-material things are not suitable subjects for science. Can you give me an example of non material. Things like concepts and ideas are writ large on paper or in grey matter. Edited March 14, 2020 by romansh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romansh Posted March 14, 2020 Author Share Posted March 14, 2020 1 minute ago, thormas said: but it wasn't there to be missed........sadly we're in rom-typical mode yet again. No you were flat out wrong … but could not find it in yourself to admit it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.