Just because science doesn't explain everything yet, you can't just jump to the conclusion "God did it" And yes, science doesn't disprove the existence of a deity, but it doesn't have to. Theists make the claim, so the burden of proof is on them. Until someone convinces me, I just see no reason to believe in a God.
Religion is pretty much dead in western society. What people really believe in is spirituallity. They like the thought that some larger being is in control of everything/ loves them/ they were brought up that way (indoctrinated) and tend to congregate in groups that pretend their invisible protector is the same. Personnaly im an agnostic-athiest.
If he includes agnostic in the title I would say agnostic. Maybe he is an agnostic who is inclined toward the athiests position.
It's possible (and very common) to be both. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism I'm an agnostic atheist because I both lack a belief in deities (atheism), but I don't claim to know with certainty (agnosticism). It's the most rational position.
^this I'm willing to be convinced that a God or supernatural power exists. But until I am convinced I will reject the existance of such an entity.
What I've been wondering is this: if we were to know at the first instant the velocity, mass, inertia, properties, temperature, pressure, etc. of every single figment of being in the Universe at any one moment, would we be able to plot the future with infinite accuracy? This is hypothetical because doing so would have to take into account the measuring apparatus.
Just be careful with this thinking. Chaos theory can only go as far as an error in knowledge of initial conditions resulting a large deviation on the predictions. Based on it, you can only say it's humanly impossible to predict the future. If a being is assumed to know all initial conditions with infinite accuracy, he could still predict everything (did you google'd Laplace's Demon? ). It is quantum mechanics that says it's impossible to know initial conditions with infinite accuracy, giving a definitive answer to the original question.
Isn't it also true that you can't know location AND velocity at the same time because knowing one prevents you from knowing the other? Not being a quantum physicist, I also ask if the hypothetical measuring device was in another dimention, allowing it to not interfere with the know Universe. If it was possible to know every particle down to the movement of tachyons across time and space. Wouldn't it also be possible if we put a device that could see into the fourthd dimention while laying outside the universe? All of what I'm saying is now seeming like foolish hypothesis .
it's Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. That's exactly why quantum mechanics says it's impossible to know the initial conditions of every particle with infinite accuracy. For example: on a limit when the uncertainty for the position is 0, the uncertainty for the momentum would be infinite. You are talking about a measuring device on another dimension, but to measure things it would have to interact with them, so that is (kind of*) not possible. You also mentioned a 4th dimension... M-theory talks about our universe being a 10-dimensional 'membrane' floating arround on a 11th dimension The existence of tachyons is theorical and so far it's not proved and not disproved. And be careful on what you think about them... even if they exist, they are believed to be highly unstable and I don't think there is a reason to believe we can know other particles behavior from detecting them... * Some particles are assumed to be 'glued' to tha universe they belong - they just can't be detected if you try to measure them outside of the universe. But some particles may be free to go outside, moving on the 11th dimension. Those are the particles that could be measured the way you described. My knowledge is limited on this, but I don't think we could actually determine the position and momentum of other particles only detecting those suposed to be free particles... I must say, though, my knowledge on fundamental physics is not that advanced, so all my opinions about things like M-theory and other 'insanely more complex than quantum mechanics stuff' are based on 'simplified' explanations I find on the internet , and those come with physics annoyingly mixed with metaphysics... Sometimes I doubt there is a reason to people think the way they do about those equations... but I just can't give an interpretation on them by myself, so...
Because the particle you're trying to detect is as large as the thing you're trying to detect it with. You can't detect the velocity and position of a car by smashing another car into it. That's all there is to it, no point into going into 70 dimensional quantum psycho trips.
Well, theoretical omniscience is still possible, but it's limited to the theoretical being only knowing the probability of something happening... Laplace's demon, in the way it was described, could never exist. and Ronald is right about the quantum psycho trip ... I just got caught on trying to explain what I know about the stuff you mentioned. I agree there was no point going into that.
I'm just saying that's all the uncertainty principle is about at core, basic limitations with with our detection methods because of particle size. It's quite a simple concept to wrap your head around and people seem to overcomplicate it unnecessarily. I also botched the last post by using url tags instead of quotes and never looked back at the thread... oh well I fixed it now.
If he is omni-benevolent, then why is there evil? Just to "test" our faith? I dont think hunger and war is exactly loving. "Hey, happy birthday! Here, have some AIDS. Wait, thats not everything. Ill shoot you in the leg aswell." :roll: If he is omniscient, why did he create the Devil in the first place? Just to troll humans? So he could have something to do?[/quote:7mccoc4w] clearly you are ignorant when it comes to the story of Satan, As the story goes Satan was an Angel who decided to betray God because he didn't like the fact that God was creating humans(who were at the time only Adam and Eve) because he felt that these creatures were inferior to them so why create them? As punishment for Satan's betrayal God exiled him from Heaven then Satan made his version of 'Heaven' which was Hell. God did not 'choose' to create Satan as you say. Also why do all Atheists assume that if God does in fact exist that he controls our every move and controls our destiny? we still make our own destiny, it's not like God holds a gun to your head saying to do this otherwise you die. For instance all the diseases that are in this world? are mostly Man's fault not Gods.
