Provisional nature of knowledge (dogma, religion, science)

[Willamena]

Originally Posted by stephenw

It is often asserted that one of the strengths of the scientific approach is the provisional nature of the understandings that it generates. I accept this.
I often see it held up as something that science 'has' over religious approaches. I do not accept this. I am a 'believer' who acknowledges that my understanding is provisional. Most other 'believers' I meet seem to be on a journey of discovery that renders their understandings provisional. Of course there are many dogmatics in religion. There are many in science too.
I cannot see the clear line between the two that is often pointed out in debate. Am I missing something?

I guess it depends on what one is looking at and referring to as "the understanding" in religion. The symbols of most religions were fixed in stone long ago, but the understanding (as I understand it) --the interpretation --evolves with each individual who grasps it.

[mball1297]

Originally Posted by stephenw

Bearing in mind that I am NOT arguing against evolutionary theory - if it had been tested and the results were robust would it not have moved past theory and have become evolutionary fact

That's why I put the in after stating that about the Big Bang theory. In science, the difference between a theory and a law is not that one is more "concrete" or "factual" than the other. It's more like two different ways of looking at things. I can't fully explain it to you, I'm realizing, but look it up. I was given a link at one point, and it really cleared it up for me. Unfortunately, I don't have it for you, but I'm sure you could find one, or maybe someon else here could explain it or give you a good link.

[Heneni]

God upholds the universe by his word.

The universe consists of matter. All matter vibrate, so all matter creates sound waves, so all of creation is talking.

The quantum theory as far as I know is saying that matter can exist in more than one place at the same time.

Hence God can be here and in heaven.

Love
Heneni

[Popeyesays]

Originally Posted by Heneni

God upholds the universe by his word.

The universe consists of matter. All matter vibrate, so all matter creates sound waves, so all of creation is talking.

The quantum theory as far as I know is saying that matter can exist in more than one place at the same time.

Hence God can be here and in heaven.

Love
Heneni

WShen referring to sub-atomic particles and photons, yes, they can at least appear to be bi-located, though they often appear to be one entity.

I doubt it holds up once an atom forms.

Regards,
Scott

[Heneni]

An atom is formed?????

when do atoms form? Atoms are in the periodic table, the atoms or elements that are in it, is all that we have found so far. So how do new atoms form? Perhaps you are referring to new substances or molecules.

Still wont change the fact that all matter vibrate. If it stops vibrating it has reached absolute zero, and that only happens when you cool it down to zero Kelvin.

Have anybody been able to make a new atom? Or are we still discovering new ones maybe.

Quantum theory is about the SAME matter occupying two different spaces at the same time.

Love
Heneni

[Rolling_Stone]

Originally Posted by Popeyesays

WShen referring to sub-atomic particles and photons, yes, they can at least appear to be bi-located, though they often appear to be one entity.

I doubt it holds up once an atom forms.

Regards,
Scott

Yup, it sure does!

[Troublemane]

Actually, religion can be tested. Thats the whole basis for Hinduism and Buddhism, as well as Gnostic Christianity and the esoteric brands of the poplular religions.

[Heneni]

Hello Troublemane
Care to give us one such example from these religions?

[Popeyesays]

bi-locational means in two places at once.

Atoms formed after the Big Bang in three ways.

The singularity from which all matter and energy came was composed not of atmos, or even electrons, neutrons and protons could not exist at that density and temprature. Only quarks could exist.

Once3 the bang occured (though there was no noise or light involved no sound could be transmitted in a total vacuum, and no photons existed yet). There were only quarks screaming about. When the density and the temprature declined those quarks began to make larger particles up to and including the odd hydrogen atom.

Those hydrogen atoms eventually co-alesced and gathered gravitically into Population III stars. Those population I stars created elements up to and including iron. The nature of all Population III stars was to gather iron in the core to the point that fusion was inhibitred and the star collap[sed and super-novaed. In that super-novae elements heavier than iron were created. Still low in metallicity, those stars collapsed and released heavier elements which allowed stars like ours to exist.

From Wikipedia:
"
The metallicity of an astronomical object may provide an indication of its age. When the universe first formed, according to the Big Bang theory, it consisted almost entirely of hydrogen which, through primordial nucleosynthesis, created a sizeable proportion of helium and only trace amounts of lithium and beryllium. The first stars, referred to as Population III, had virtually no metals at all. (Anything heavier than helium is considered a metal.) These stars were incredibly massive and, near the end of their lives, created the first 26 elements up to iron in the periodic table via nucleosynthesis. They subsequently died in spectacular supernovae (because they have not been observed this is not proven, but supernovae do create heavier elements) that completely dispersed their material, ejecting those elements throughout the universe. As of 2007, no Population III stars have been found; rather, their existence is inferred in current models of the origin of the universe. The next generation of stars was born out of those materials left by the death of the first. The oldest observed stars, known as Population II, have very low metallicities;[2] as subsequent generations of stars were born they became more metal-enriched, as the gaseous clouds from which they formed received the metal-rich dust manufactured by previous generations. As those stars died, they returned metal-enriched material to the interstellar medium via planetary nebulae and supernovae, enriching the nebulae out of which the newer stars formed ever further. These youngest stars, including the Sun, therefore have the highest metal content, and are known as Population I stars.
Across the Milky Way, metallicity is higher in the galactic centre and decreases as one moves outwards. The gradient in metallicity is attributed to the density of stars in the galactic centre: there are more stars in the centre of the galaxy and so, over time, more metals have been returned to the interstellar medium and incorporated into new stars. By a similar mechanism, larger galaxies tend to have a higher metallicity than their smaller counterparts. In the case of the Magellanic Clouds, two small irregular galaxies