Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Sorry, but the excuse "it was incomplete" does not fly.
You conflated an amount with a rate and then called me a liar when I corrected you.
And a B? Are you kidding. That rates a D at the most.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
God discovered by Science
- Thread starter Sophiaa
- Start date
You conflated an amount with a rate and then called me a liar when I corrected you.
And a B? Are you kidding. That rates a D at the most.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
We have classical Newtonian physics, we have Relativity, and we have quantum mechanics. What we don't have, as far as I'm aware, is a single unifying theory that provides us with a working picture of the natural world. This, I gather, is certainly the case in relation to gravity.
Of course this only matters if you agree with Einstein's assertion that "The programmatic aim of all physics, is the complete description of any real situation as it supposedly exists". To be fair, the current orthodoxy seems to be with you, in that all that matters is not what is, but what works; "Shut up and calculate", as David Mermin said. This is most unsatisfying for philosophers though. And this is not a science forum.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Sorry but saying "power is the amount of energy transferred" (#83) is like saying speed is the amount of distance travelled. It's not incomplete, it's plain wrong.
Speed is the rate at which distance is traversed and power is the rate at which energy is transferred. When you add that to you confusing these with force as well (OP), it adds up to a rather obvious lack of understanding.
Sophiaa
Member
What I wrote is still up there read it again
Let me send it to you read it again below before you comment
In the case of a universe that is approximately uniform in space, one can show that this negative gravitational energy exactly cancels the positive energy represented by the matter. So the total energy of the universe is zero."
Bible show devil is the negative energy
Devil is the opposer of God and opposition to God what ever God does devil want to do and pervert it
That why the total is zero
Sophiaa
Member
What I wrote is still up there read it again
Let me send it to you read it again below before you comment
In the case of a universe that is approximately uniform in space, one can show that this negative gravitational energy exactly cancels the positive energy represented by the matter. So the total energy of the universe is zero."
Bible show devil is the negative energy
Devil is the opposer of God and opposition to God what ever God does devil want to do and pervert it
That why the total is zero
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
I can do better, but I'm a little busy right now. And while my ego may be invested in winning arguments, I am not my ego, and winning an argument is not my intent.
However, there is nothing solid in the universe, nothing fixed. Pretty sure science is confirming here what the Buddha intuited millennia ago.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
It's a gap in our knowledge that everybody (who follows these things) is aware of. And, although most people assume that gravity needs to be brought into quantum field theory, the actual situation is that we don't know how much either will have to change to unify the two.
Still don't get what your point is.
Why? Seems silly to me
Sophiaa
Member
Who created gravity or I don't know what you are talking about now
Maybe you don't know the answer or gravity has it own intelligence
If you don't know the answer it means
Any force can create the universe
Am waiting for the answer who created gravity why was it not created
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
You have given no reason to think there was a 'who' that created gravity.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Again.... you're saying that the devil is negative energy. And in the previous paragraph, you identified negative energy with gravity.
So you're saying the devil = gravity.
Exactly like I said you did.
Why do you deny having said it? It is obviously exactly what you said.
If A = B and B = C, then A = C.
Sophiaa
Member
I did not lie it was a typing error so all you had to do was say that definition is not complete then I would have cross check you just said it not the definition
There is a big difference
Sophiaa
Member
I want to learn kindly summarize what the link said created the mass and gravity
Sophiaa
Member
Funny... It shows you don't know
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
So you are just going to reject the valid objections and questions I raised about your fallacious loaded question by using an argument from ignorance and double down on the same error?
I can only repeat my questions as they remain unanswered / unaddressed
1. when and how did you establish that gravity required any "creating"?
2. when and how did you establish that, assuming it had to be created, that it was a "who" that created it and not a "what"?
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
And when one doesn't know, one can just say "the god i happen to believe in dun it", right?
This is your entire modus operandi.
Fallacious from start to finish.
I am not here to learn for you, here is the link again if you can't be bothered looking back a couple of pages
.
The early universe
We Never Know
No Slack
Which came first, mass or gravity? Or do we really know?
It seems gravity influences mass and mass influences gravity.