Atheism and Physics are Phenomen of Apostle Peter

[Unveiled Artist]

And no one is saying you have to. Again... call a shovel a shovel, and a spade a spade. If someone is being demonstrably incoherent, or contradicting themselves or evidence, or they are being hypocritical, or not taking into account pertinent information, or ignoring blatantly obvious items that make their talking points moot... then you tell them so. And you do so without tip-toeing. Or, at least, I do. And you can surely try and make me apologize for it as much you are potentially able to do so. Just know that I will surely come to my own defense, and it may be a harder battle won than just saying "It is wrong to judge!"

I don't know the OP well-enough to want to judge him or her.

What does this have to do with you personally?

 

[questfortruth]

I don't know the OP well-enough to want to judge him or her.

CV: Dmitri Martila (etis.ee)

 

[Windwalker]

The founder of Scientific Atheism is the talented scientist Pierre Simon Laplace. That is, Simon-Peter.
The France name Pierre translates as Peter.

So you don't mean the Simon Peter that followed Jesus, just some modern dude that you make sound like it as the Peter of the gospels we all know. Very strange.

 

[questfortruth]

So you don't mean the Simon Peter that followed Jesus, just some modern dude that you make sound like it as the Peter of the gospels we all know. Very strange.

Yah, to be the author of the Riemann hypothesis proof means a complicated brain.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I see logical contradiction:
1) in the past many atheists used two words to define their position: "No God".
2) now many of them say: "we do not claim, that there is no God." But the same can say any theist.

I see total confusion.

Theism means -- literally -- belief in god.
a-Theism is the opposite -- literally -- no belief in god(s).
Poly-Theism means -- literally -- belief in more than one god.
Pan-Theism means -- literally -- belief that everything in the universe, taken together, is God.
Panen-Theism means -- literally -- the belief that God is greater than the universe and includes and interpenetrates it.

All these words are constructed out of root words to give them the meanings they hold. Cut and paste this post, put it on a flash card, so that you can remember it later, okay?

 

[questfortruth]

a-Theism is the opposite -- literally -- no belief in god(s).

So, atheist does not say, that there is no god?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

So, atheist does not say, that there is no god?

Is there only one way to say things in your language? We have lots of ways to express ourselves in English. "There is no god" is, for most atheists, exactly the same thing as saying "I believe there is no God," or "I don't believe in any gods." It's just shorter and more convenient. They all mean -- essentially -- the same thing.

The honest atheist knows full-well that he cannot "prove" the non-existence of God, any more than the theist can "prove" the existence of God. He also knows that he cannot "prove" the non-existence of fairies, elves and trolls, no, nor even unicorns (nor can those who claim to believe in them actually provide any evidence, either). But he does know that there is precisely zero evidence (outside of the fancies of people, sometimes actually written into books) for the existence of any of them, and so he wastes no more time worrying about them.

 

[QuestioningMind]

So, atheist does not say, that there is no god?

Do you think that the answer to this question has changed since the last dozen times you asked it?

For the last time, atheism is simply a lack of belief in any god or gods. SOME atheists take it a step further and state that they not only lack a belief in any god or gods, but they ALSO declare that there is no god or gods. But that's just SOME atheists and it is in no way a requirement for being an atheist. You've been told this numerous times. Why do you keep childishly pretending as if you haven't?

 

[Clara Tea]

Mod: "No-one on this forum takes you seriously anymore."
Me: "My proofs for Riemann Hypothesis, Goldbach's, Twin prime conjectures are 25 days now under consideration of most top math journals, surely, I am stupid."

Quest for truth: “Simon, son of Jonah, you will be called Peter - the Stone. And on this rock, I will build My Church. " (the Bible). As many as two letters of Peter are in the New Testament. And his acts are in the Book of Acts. Peter is the supreme apostle for the Jews. The Paul for the Gentiles. Hence, Peter-Stone is the cornerstone of the Church.

So, since then everything is based on some kind of stone: The founder of Scientific Atheism is the talented scientist Pierre Simon Laplace. The France name Pierre translates as Peter. That is, Simon-Peter. He told the emperor about God "I didn't need this hypothesis." He was the introducer of atheism as the basis worldview into Scientific Community. Science was atheism-free until Peter Simon Laplace was born. He founded scientific atheism. The Modern Science was founded only after 15-th century. Science in prior times was connected with pagan gods (the texts of pagan thinker Aristotle). After 15-th century and before Laplace's birth, it was Christian Science. Peter Simon Laplace was the most influential, most rich, and most talented scientist in the pre-Einstein era, please read his glorious extraordinary brilliant biography. The words and influence of ordinary atheist on Science is near zero. Thus, the voices of some strange people before Laplace's birth have not spoiled the course of Science.

The founder of the modern scientific picture of the world is the German Einstein. From German: "Stein" - Stone. The "ein" is the usual addition in German: "Einstein = Ein Stein".

Because Einstein's ideas are well supported by observations and experiments, Einstein is truly right.

Proof:

In Einstein's theory for a system of size S, holds not the Einstein equation in its textbook form, but the scientific description contains the value of S. In the limit S=0 the Einstein equations emerge. Hence, any future theory, which has as limit Einstein Equations, coincides with Einstein Theory. Hence, the ideas to generalize Einstein equations using non-locality or non-linearity
[Hehl and Mashhoon in Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 064028; Cooperstock and Tieu in astro-ph/0507619]
are not new physics at all.

The Einstein Equations must emerge in the limit S=0, because of Newton's principle: "I was standing on the shoulders of giants": the new theory must not contradict old theory in the area of its applicability. For low energies holds Newton formulas, for high energies - Einstein. There is no third option because all range of energy is well covered by these two theories.

This explains why Scientific Community continues to search for dark matter particles
and plans to do so indefinitely. My idea is the same particles, but they have no weak interaction [as well as any other "direct-contact" interaction (which are strong and electromagnetic ones)]. Or, more generally: "Dark Matter (and Dark Energy) is a substance that has no weak (or any else) interaction with an ordinary substance." That explains how angels and devils can move through closed walls of houses: angels are made of such invisible matter, which has no interactions with ordinary matter.

Unproven God is believed by theists and not believed by atheists.

Self proclaimed genius " "My proofs for Riemann Hypothesis, Goldbach's, Twin prime conjectures are 25 days now under consideration of most top math journals," a humble way of proving God by saying that you are smarter than the rest of us, similarly is unproven, until those journals accept your genius. It is odd that one person simultaneously proves two unproven math problems that have stumped the greatest geniuses of all time.

"Peter-Stone is the cornerstone of the Church"

https://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/35/messages/1155.html

Mae west said "is that a pickle in your pocket, or are you glad to see me."

"everything is based on some kind of stone"

Apophenia - Wikipedia

Apophenia (/æpoʊˈfiːniə/) is the tendency to perceive meaningful connections between unrelated things. The term (German: Apophänie) was coined by psychiatrist Klaus Conrad in his 1958 publication on the beginning stages of schizophrenia.

"founder of Scientific Atheism is the talented scientist Pierre Simon Laplace"

Pierre-Simon Laplace - Wikipedia

Wikipedia (Laplace): "Someone had told Napoleon that the book contained no mention of the name of God; Napoleon, who was fond of putting embarrassing questions, received it with the remark, 'M. Laplace, they tell me you have written this large book on the system of the universe, and have never even mentioned its Creator.' Laplace, who, though the most supple of politicians, was as stiff as a martyr on every point of his philosophy, drew himself up and answered bluntly, Je n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothèse-là. ("I had no need of that hypothesis.")"

Laplace made math calculations and didn't constantly praise God for the outcomes. Did that make Laplace an atheist? Is this a reason to battle all mathematicians and scientists? Should we go back to the good old days of torturing scientists to death (in a very pious way, of course)?

"Science was atheism-free until Laplace was born." What about all those scientists who were tortured to death by the Catholic Church? What about those scientists who were threatened to recant their scientific beliefs or face horrible torture and death? People like Galileo, for example.

Can you picture Galileo telling the king that the telescope will allow him to see distant objects clearer, then tell him to use only one eye, then have the king use the wrong eye (looking through the telescope with the closed eye). King: "Off with his head."

Limit S=0: I think that you are referring to the Correspondence Principle. That means that the theory of Special Relativity (of Einstein) must agree with Newtonian physics when dealing with objects that travel slowly, though at high speeds, Special Relativity takes over. It also means that the rules of Quantum Mechanics must change to Newtonian mechanics when dealing with very large objects, but when dealing with very small objects the rules of Quantum Mechanics apply.

Let me rephrase (for clarity) the above statement. Special Relativity is for traveling at nearly the speed of light, but the theory must convert to Newtonian physics (that we are comfortable using because we can observe it in our daily lives) when velocity is small. Similarly, Quantum Mechanics (which governs small objects) must break down to Newtonian Mechanics when dealing with larger objects. All this is by the Correspondence Principle.

It was rather shocking to Einstein that probability dominated the laws of motion in small distances (where Quantum Mechanics dominates). This is why Einstein said "God doesn't play dice with the universe."

Dark matter: I got the impression that dark matter is normal matter that one cannot see. So, it might consist of neutron stars that no longer glow. Or, it might consist of hydrogen gas which cannot be seen unless light shines on it which would allow the gas to absorb certain frequencies of light (absorption spectrum) or unless the gas was heated to radiate certain frequencies of light (emission spectrum). Although there might be some dark matter that we have not yet encountered.

Dark energy, that they speculate is responsible for the expansion of the universe, is said to have reverse gravity (thus accelerating the expansion of the universe).

dark energy | Definition, Discoverers, & Facts

Encyclopedia Britannica (dark energy): "Dark energy is detected by its effect on the rate at which the universe expands and its effect on the rate at which large-scale structures such as galaxies and clusters of galaxies form through gravitational instabilities."

I think that you are saying that dark matter and dark energy is different, and does not interact with normal matter, but, nonetheless, affects the acceleration of the expansion of the universe.

Spooky action (quantum entanglement) is another interesting issue. We know that nothing travels faster than the speed of light in a vacuum, yet, if we change the spin of one entangled particle, the other entangled particle spin will also change, immediately, regardless of distance apart.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Mod: "No-one on this forum takes you seriously anymore."

Really? How could that ever be? What could lead anyone to such a conclusion?

 

[questfortruth]

It is odd that one person simultaneously proves two unproven math problems that have stumped the greatest geniuses of all time.

No problem, because I am talking with God, I have asked to reveal me proofs. Journals 25 days are busy. Each Proof is one or two pages long.

 

[questfortruth]

For the last time, atheism is simply a lack of belief in any god or gods. SOME atheists take it a step further and state that they not only lack a belief in any god or gods, but they ALSO declare that there is no god or gods.

Those ones, who have not made the last step, are theists. Atheism is the lowest level.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Those ones, who have not made the last step, are theists. Atheism is the lowest level.

Defenition of Atheism is

Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. ... The etymological root for the word atheism originated before the 5th century BCE from the ancient Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning "without god(s)".

 

[questfortruth]

Defenition of Atheism is

Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. ... The etymological root for the word atheism originated before the 5th century BCE from the ancient Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning "without god(s)".

You might be surprised to learn how many wrong definitions, fake definitions are out there in textbooks.

 

[Spirit of Light]

You might be surprised to learn how many wrong definitions, fake definitions are out there in textbooks.

Well i have to say, i do speak with a lot of atheists online and offline, and all of them, i mean all of those i spoken with tell me, Atheism is lack of belief in God.

Do you mean to say all of them is telling a lie, so i should listen to you who say you are not an atheist?

 

[questfortruth]

Well i have to say, i do speak with a lot of atheists online and offline, and all of them, i mean all of those i spoken with tell me, Atheism is lack of belief in God.

Do you mean to say all of them is telling a lie, so i should listen to you who say you are not an atheist?

Logic is simple
1. Atheism is lowest level of spirituality.
2. There are two levels inside Atheism:
Level A: "no faith in God",
Level B: "no god".
The level B is absolute low,

 

[Spirit of Light]

Logic is simple
1. Atheism is lowest level of spirituality.
2. There are two levels inside Atheism:
Level A: "no faith in God",
Level B: "no god".
The level B is absolute low,

Do you mean to say all of the atheist i spoken with is telling a lie, so i should listen to you who say you are not an atheist?

 

[questfortruth]

Do you mean to say all of the atheist i spoken with is telling a lie, so i should listen to you who say you are not an atheist?

Please.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Please be my follower. But you are free man.

I am a follower of Allah, so thank you for the offer but. no thank you

 

[QuestioningMind]

Those ones, who have not made the last step, are theists. Atheism is the lowest level.

Quit making up your own personal definitions. It's sad and pathetic that you're incapable of having an honest conversation on the subject. Why is your faith so weak that you feel so threatened by my lack of belief?