The Mahatama's ideology did not fail. It has not failed. You cannot judge his contribution to mankind by only looking at the nation's partition.
For me the greatest thing about Gandhi (despite all his human shortcomings) is that he laid the foundation (along with other great leaders of the...
Question 1: We take the regeneration of our cells for granted. But why in the world should cells regenerate or DNA replicate?
Is death being "beneficial at species level" a mere by-chance byproduct of death or is the species thinking with a collective consciousness and doing thing that are in...
When our human bodies posses the ability to rejuvenate and renew itself (it displays this from the time its born, through youth) why does this process stop at a particular age? What is the purpose of gradual degradation of the body and what is the purpose of death? Which part of science explains...
I believe that by definition dharma is not static. and the reason for that is that it is inward looking. and since every individual is different dharma must change case by case. the ritualistic part of dharma may remain static (mantras, shlokas, mythology, etc.) but the spiritual part has never...
To all my friends who insist on stating that the point of singularity it was a pin point, etc. etc. Please read more. Firstly, this pin point is of immense mass and its size is infinity in the negative. If you have any fundamental understanding of calculus, you will understand what it means...
Since I seem to be lacking in my fundamentals:
i) What did the universe start from according to the big bang theory?
ii) What is the correct inference in physics when you hit infinity on both sides of the equation?
iii) "Best we have" is a relative term. 'Best' is subject to interpretation...
Ok. I largely concede to your argument. But there are a few observations that I think still leave scope for doubt.
i) There is a difference between religion and religious people. People tend to corrupt things for their own gain. In fact, to my mind the very concept of religion is flawed...
For about fifty years the Big Bang theory was the accepted explanation of the birth of the universe. However, in the last ten years certain 'missing links' in the theory have forced scientists to reconsider.
The simplest way to explain this is to by first looking at the way science, specially...
In that case, your earlier argument also stands corrected:
"Whether or not you agree with the big bang theory is irrelevant to the existence of science. The fact that there is a big bang theory to disagree with is proof of the existence of science."
It should now read:
"Whether or not...
I must clarify here, I am not a devoutly religious person. In fact, I swing from a believer to an atheist, depending on how bad my day was. However, I have been doing some reading for some time now and I want to put the beliefs of an atheist to test. Like an experiment, if you like.
Now to...
1. Quoting you as directed :)
2. Whether or not you agree with the big bang theory is irrelevant to the existence of science. The fact that there is a big bang theory to disagree with is proof of the existence of science.
how is this different from
Whether or not you agree with the...
The 'ultimate truth' may well be a claim that religious people make. However, even a cursory glance at the history of religion reveals that religion is just as vulnerable to examination and rejection as a scientific theory. Not to go too far, but Judaism led to Christianity, which in turn led to...
Well, its an academic exercise for me (I can only speak for myself).
It started with me saying, in an unrelated discussion, that "not believing in something is also a belief system".
Immortal Flame disagreed.
This went back and forth for some time, without much being achieved.
So I...
Orias, you are welcome to join in the discussion. However, your presumption that I know nothing of physics or science is a presumption.
But we will let that presumption hold for now.
Kindly, spoon feed me.
Your information is not updated.
First, "it started from a singular infinitely dense particle" is now a rejected theory. What you are referring to is Lamaitre's "hypothesis of the primeval atom". However, given its several flaws it is now more or less losing favour within the scientific...
The previous discussions were aimless. Let's move from point to point.
So what science suggests is that:
i) The universe began some 13.7 billion years ago
ii) It started with a big bang
iii) It began from nothing (absolute nothing)
iv) And from nothing the entire universe and all we see and...
You claim to have an open mind. Let's test it.
Here is a statement:
I have an absence in belief in existence of science.
(Science because that is the more potent and favoured weapon of an aethist).
Let's start at the Big Bang.
First question:
What was there before the Big Bang.
This is...