[Stryke 9]

I don't think he's talking about the Unified Field Theory. I might be wrong, though.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
On a side note, religion isn't really supposed to explain the "how". That is the role of science.  The purpose of religion and philosophy is to instead explain the "why".

Science: We are born, we live, and we die.
Religion: Why are we born, why do we live, and why do we die?

Religion makes the assumption that there is a why. There may not be one. We may simply be born, live and die simply because the Earth has conditions that made it possible.

[TrashMan]

I just had a talk with my community priest...Guess what ..

He sez tat good people go to heaven REGARDLESS OF THEIR FAITH....

And to get back on topic:
As one philosopher/saint once said: "If you could understand him, then it wouldn't be God..."

On the side note, one  does not "belive" in science. Science just is.
I don't belive that there is a tree trunk right infront of me...I see it..I know it. One belives in things one doen't know about.
Going against science is like saying that there is no tree trunk, which is incredibly apsurd and dumb....

@Sandwich - I don't drink alchocol at all. Hate it. Tastes terrible. And nubs the mind.

[diamondgeezer]

Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
The Unified Field Theory isn't supposed to explain the "why". It's just supposed to be a single theory that can explain the gravitic, electromagnetic, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear forces. Where'd you get the idea that the Unified Field Theory will explain everything?

I was refering to the theory of everything as described in Universe in a Nutshell. Think about it - if you could understand exactly how EVERYTHING happens, you could employ simple cause-and-effect to determine why. The initial event may be a bit tricky, but then they call it the theory of everythign for a reason...

[Ghostavo]

If you knew the exact velocity and position of every particle in the universe you would know everything there was, is and will be... it that was possible in the first place of course. But the closest you are to figuring out the position of a particle the farther you are from finding out it's velocity and vice-versa.

Even so you would only find out how it happened, why is something we humans made up. (personal opinion)

[Blaise Russel]

Originally posted by TrashMan
I don't belive that there is a tree trunk right infront of me...

Yes you do.

Unless, of course, you can provide me with a logical proof that there is a tree trunk in front of you, that there is a tree trunk to be in front of you, that there is a you to be behind a tree trunk, and that there is a reality for you to exist in and have a tree trunk in front of you.

Unfortunately, you can't. For all you know, it could all be just a dream, or not even that.

Funnily enough, while the problem of 'you have no reason to consider that true' applies to ideas that we're just butterflies dreaming we're men, it also applies to the idea that we are real men after all.

[Ghostavo]

And if you take apart the nucleus? You’ll be in for a big surprise. For inside an atom’s nucleus, reality as we know it actually ceases to exist.

Protons and Neutrons maybe? After that Quarks? etc...?
He's talking about the freaking String Theory... nothing about non-existance and stuff...

[Grey Wolf]

Diamondgeezer, Ghostavo is right. A theory of everything as you stated is impossible due to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. You can not know both the location and velocity of an object at any given time.

[diamondgeezer]

Eep. Better go tell Hawking and his mates they're wasting their time then

[Blaise Russel]

Originally posted by Ghostavo
Protons and Neutrons maybe? After that Quarks? etc...?
He's about the freaking String Theory... nothing about non-existance and stuff...

...

Okay, that was completely random.

[Flipside]

I thought Hawkins theories worked on groups of objects, so while you cannot know an electrons precise location and velocity simultaneously, you can know the average location and velocity of a group of electrons? Always reminded me a little of Physcohistory actually

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
Diamondgeezer, Ghostavo is right. A theory of everything as you stated is impossible due to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. You can not know both the location and velocity of an object at any given time.

IIRC Heisenbergers principle is specifically "you cannot observe something without altering it".  

I.e. if you measure the position of an atom, you change it's velocity, and vice versa.

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by TrashMan
I just had a talk with my community priest...Guess what ..

He sez tat good people go to heaven REGARDLESS OF THEIR FAITH....

And you agree with him?

Originally posted by TrashMan
@Sandwich - I don't drink alchocol at all. Hate it. Tastes terrible. And nubs the mind.

Ahh, then that's a matter of personal taste.

[Grey Wolf]

"The more precisely the position is determined, the less precisely the momentum is known in this instant, and vice versa."

That is the Uncertainty Principle.

[Ghostavo]

What did I say?

[karajorma]

Originally posted by TrashMan
I just had a talk with my community priest...Guess what ..

He sez tat good people go to heaven REGARDLESS OF THEIR FAITH....

ummm. Then why be a christian? Be an atheist. You still get into heaven and you get Sundays off

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Sandwich
And you agree with him?

He IS a priest, Sandwich. Why shouldn't Trashman believe him?

[Knight Templar]

Because of what he does to Trashman's lil' brother Tuesday nights?

[mikhael]

Uncalled for.

[Stryke 9]

I shoulda laid a bet at the beginning of this thread as to how long we could go without a pedophile priest joke.

Woulda lost, but anyway.