God needs to be extremely intelligent to not only provide the right amount of matter/energy but also exactly the right parameters for the Universe to self-assemble as it did. — Marco Colombini
Space indeed exists. In the realm of science, there is no question that space exists. — Marco Colombini
I would say that Marco's faith (assuming he has a thing called faith) is the same or similar faith that the atheist has in his/her belief system. — 3017amen
Space indeed exists. In the realm of science, there is no question that space exists. — Marco Colombini
Without that correct model our GPS system would not work properly. — Marco Colombini
A demonstration in one sentence of two things: 1) there is no accounting for what some people will say, ...........So I shall make the effort to communicate with you at your level, so that you will understand, no questions necessary. It will seem harsh, but given your style of discussion, it is actually just right: Fuck you, stupid! — tim wood
With our current level of technology it would be extremely difficult to assemble very large stones of different shapes with extreme precision. Also cutting perfect square holes into hard stone is virtually impossible without modern tools and indeed would be even difficult today. — Marco Colombini
something does not need to have mass to exist. Photons have no mass. That allows them to travel at the speed of light. If they had mass then they could not travel at the speed of light because at that speed anything with mass would have an infinite mass and thus require infinite energy to reach the speed of light. If the definition of existence includes having mass then the definition is wrong.
How do we know that the mass of a particle increases with speed? Well, when charged particles are accelerated, the mass increases as described by Einstein's equations. In particle accelerators that increase in mass must be considered in order to control the motion of the particle and reach speeds close to that of light.
By the way, mass is not permanent. The collision of a particle and an antiparticle (e.g. electron and a positron) results in total annihilation producing gamma rays that have no mass. Mass is converted to energy as described in Einstein's famous equation, E=mc^2.
Perhaps there is another (valid) example of something that both exists and does not exist. I'd be curious to hear about it. — Marco Colombini
Perhaps there is another (valid) example of something that both exists and does not exist. I'd be curious to hear about it. — Marco Colombini
How do we know that the mass of a particle increases with speed? — Marco Colombini
Regarding consciousness, I don't know what is consciousness. My speculation is that it is the soul that is using the brain as an interface into this reality. This is obviously not science. — Marco Colombini
, let me start by dealing with energy becoming unavailable and the universe eventually becoming dead as far as living organisms are concerned. I focus on living organisms because of their importance but, in fact, all activity will eventually cease. Every action requires that matter and energy are conserved. However, energy exists in two parts, usable and non-usable energy. Every action converts more energy from the usable to the non-usable form. Eventually all the energy will become non-usable and thus no action can take place. — Marco Colombini
s the Universe hostile to life? Yes in a sense it is. However, the fundamental conditions for life to form at all are very difficult to achieve and our science only understands these in a very limited way. For example, if all there was in the Universe is Hydrogen and Helium, life could not possibly exist. A small change in the fundamental constants of the Universe would have that result. If there were no carbon atoms, there would be no life as we know it. — Marco Colombini
Again, it is well understood that the amount of carbon is critically dependent on the energetics of subatomic particles. A small change would not allow sufficient carbon to exist for life to form. Even the simplest cell is extremely complicated, relying for survival on the exact amount of interaction energy between its molecular components. In short, it is very easy to get the wrong conditions and have a dead universe. — Marco Colombini
For a poor analogy, consider that it is very easy to assemble something that looks like a car but does not function...anyone could do that. Whereas it is very difficult to produce a working car if one is stranded in an uninhabited island. The information and skills required are enormous.
It is very easy to misuse logic because, unlike mathematics, words and meanings are not precise — Marco Colombini
The fact is that the Universe exists and did not exist. Did it come from nothing? All we know is the matter/energy with which we are familiar. Is there other "stuff"? Our senses can only detect our matter/energy so we cannot detect any other stuff. — Marco Colombini
Are there many Gods? The only information on that matter comes not from science but from statements attributed to God. — Marco Colombini
I'm a scientist. Historically scientists and philosophers were one and the same. My degree is a doctor of philosophy (Ph.D.). The separation in recent times is unfortunate. I apologize for not addressing your concerns but I'd like to keep the focus elsewhere.Gregory
I'm a scientist. Historically scientists and philosophers were one and the same. My degree is a doctor of philosophy (Ph.D.). — Marco Colombini
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.