What do you think?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not looking for point/counter-point arguments, just thoughtful answers:
what do you think about the enormity of the universe? Do you believe in the big bang and the multi-dimensional universe of the superstring theory? Do you believe in creationism? Are you aware that both of these theories have huge holes in them currently? Does that bother you or does your faith overcome doubt?

Not to promote argument, but simply to explain, Brian Greene is the current leader on Superstring Theory. In fact, he has been chastised from the beginning for persuing his theories on fase, rather than factual evidence. In his book "The Elegant Universe", he admits to these large holes in his theory several times: pg. 152, bottom of 2nd paragraph and beginning of 3rd. Page 179, first sentence in 2nd paragraph, page 210 and 211 regarding Edward Witten; "is this prediction correct? We don't know." Page 212 top paragraph goes on to explain that the theory "postulates on nature some hundred million billion times smaller than anything we can directly probe experimentally." Page 215 "The Road To Experiment" further explains the impossibility of proving the superstring theory as "it would requre and accelerator the size of the whole universe" and that "US Congress ultimately canceled funding for the Superconducting Supercollider a 'mere' 54 miles in circumfrance." Therefore, to test superstring theory experimentally, "it will have to be in an indirect manner... observed on length scales that are far larger than the size of a string itself." Page 219 on "Exhausting Possiblities" very specifically shows lack of factual understanding. Page 318 and 319 ("...nor do we have any greater insight... the challenge to the string theorist is to show that some point on the theory map actually describes our universe. To do this requires finding the full and exact equations whose solution will pick out this elusive point on the map and then undersatnding the corresponding physics with sufficent precision to allow comparisons with experiment." Page 328 "As we drove out of the parking lot and left the campus, we realized that although our agreements were strong and convincing, they were not thoroughly airtight". Page 384 regarding supersymmetry: "its experimental confirmation would be a compelling, albeit circumstantial, piece of evidence for strings. Page 385 (summing up, toward the end of the book): "maybe we will have to accept that certain features of the universe are the way they are because of happenstance, accident or divine choice"

So, yes, whatever your opinion happens to be, it has large holes in it. Now, what are your opinnions, please?

Nude Spock, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

new answers... btw, that was supposed to read "In fact, he has been chastised from the beginning for persuing his theories on faith (not "fase"), rather than factual evidence."

Nude Spock, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Oh yeah, I'm not going to argue about anything with anyone during the course of this thread. Hopefully, none of you will feel the need to do this either. The problem is that people seem to consider theories and traditional beliefs to be facts, when they are not. Obviously, religion is flawed, but even the coolest sounding theories are just that and the slightest bit of proven contrary evidence ruins the whole thing.

Nude Spock, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Creationism doesn't have any flaws in it really. it's perfectly internally consistent. it's also one of the least imaginative or interesting things anyone has ever had to say about the world. that is, in the words of the thread title, what i think.

Alan at home, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

i like superstring theory cuz of all the dimensions: 11! yay!! Varying degrees of Riemannian space curvature is nice: if you go off in THAT direction it takes a bazillion years to get back here, but in THAT direction, a bazillionth of a second…

If ghosts existed we would all be seeing them all the time.

mark s, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Well, I see what you're saying, I guess. If you break it down to no specific religion and just take the notion "god is the beginning and the end, there is nothing else" it's a circular argument that is airtight but unprovable. I think the unprovableness of it is where the hole lies. If you take individual religions, you will find contradictions in each. Hope that didn't sound like an argument, I was just meaning to clarify which "holes" are present in creation theory.

Nude Spock, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

HEY!! What do ghosts have to do with this thread? Is there some ghost-theory of the universe I'm unaware of?

Nude Spock, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

That's really spooky. I posted it on the supernatural thread, but it turned up here!

mark s, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

ghost in the machine

Nude Spock, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I actually feel more comfortable with the idea that I'm a silly little monkey sitting on a giant rock hurtling aimlessly through space than with any thought of a divine scheme. I can cope with the whole universe just beng here with no purpose, it suits me fine.

DG, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Just to clarify, though, I didn't mean for this thread to be about purpose (i.e. religious duties, afterlives of pleasure or torment, etc.). I just was wondering what you believe the nature of the universe is, which theory you subscribe to, if any, or your personal take on it all. For instance, some scientifically minded types might say it's all been a lucky coincidence of chance photon activity while another scientifically minded type might say it's an ongoing and organized process. Still, a religious-minded person might say photons are god's magic wand.

Hell, I'm convinced I'm a monkey floating on a rock, but I still speculate on what it is, what I am and all that good mind-numbing shit, knowing full-well I will never know.

Nude Spock, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I don't know and I don't really care. It is one of the things people argue about that seems utterly irrelevant to my life.

Maria, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Monkey on rock hurtling through space = breaking the speed limit without doing anything = classic. I'm happy with that.

Ned Raggett, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I don't believe in creationism, that would just be too damn unfair, even though I would get to blame God instead of my parents. So I guess evolution it is for me.

Menelaus Darcy, Sunday, 4 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

i don't believe in elvis, i just believe in me.

Geoff, Monday, 5 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

"Not looking for point/counter-point arguments, just thoughtful answers: what do you think about the enormity of the universe? Do you believe in the big bang and the multi-dimensional universe of the superstring theory? Do you believe in creationism? Are you aware that both of these theories have huge holes in them currently? Does that bother you or does your faith overcome doubt?" The Universe only seems big because we're small. There is allot of evidence for the big bang. The universe has multiple dimensions. Creationism is highly unlikely. In fact, its possible the universe has always existed, even before the big bang. How can you create what's always been there?

Mike Hanle y, Monday, 5 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Clay pot = created + always been there. Creationism = best arg for multidimensional aliens evah and most inescapable conclusion of physics.

Tracer Hand, Monday, 5 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.