Atoms

[Nostromo]

AoS, isn't it strange that half the quotes you post only exist on your website.

 

[tansy]

So basically, it would appear that scientists seem to have come to a point where mcuh of what they're trying to figure out IS hypothetical and unproven, because so far there seem to be a lot of obstacles that don't quite fit their (otherwise pretty good) figurings-out.
For example, on this prgramme I was watching, it said that the Big Bang theory pretty well held water, apart from certan problems, which could be solved by other
ways of looking at things..but those ways produced even more difficulties. Unless there is some big breakthrough, it seems that science is becoming more and more hypothetical...it seems (on the face of it) that it's getting harder and harder to come up with concrete evidence to prove various models or concepts.
Still, fascinating stuff!

 

[Doveaman]

So basically, it would appear that scientists seem to have come to a point where mcuh of what they're trying to figure out IS hypothetical and unproven, because so far there seem to be a lot of obstacles that don't quite fit their (otherwise pretty good) figurings-out.
For example, on this prgramme I was watching, it said that the Big Bang theory pretty well held water, apart from certan problems, which could be solved by other
ways of looking at things..but those ways produced even more difficulties. Unless there is some big breakthrough, it seems that science is becoming more and more hypothetical...it seems (on the face of it) that it's getting harder and harder to come up with concrete evidence to prove various models or concepts.
Still, fascinating stuff!

Yes, I'm fascinated by how complicated the Big Bang model is becoming, even for those who believe in it.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

AoS, isn't it strange that half the quotes you post only exist on your website.

No it's not strange. It's because it's proprietary research...

I'll be happy to source anything you're curious about.

 

[Chesterton]

Edited: I put this somewhere more appropriate.

 

[LightHorseman]

FYI: The New York Times is an actual citation.

Hello? weren't you the one criticising wikipedia for not being a scientific citation? Neither is the NY times.

I'm still waiting for you to show me where Hawking actually said he didn't believe black holes exist. I'm guessing I'll be waiting a l-o-o-o-ng time, huh?

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Hello? weren't you the one criticising wikipedia for not being a scientific citation? Neither is the NY times.

I'm still waiting for you to show me where Hawking actually said he didn't believe black holes exist. I'm guessing I'll be waiting a l-o-o-o-ng time, huh?

If Hawking didn't believe in black holes he couldn't have possibly lost the bet.

Regardless, what Hawking believes is irrelevant.

Black holes do not exist in physical reality.

"...the 'Schwarzschild singularities' do not exist in physical reality." -- Albert Einstein, 1939

 

[LightHorseman]

If Hawking didn't believe in black holes he couldn't have possibly lost the bet.

Regardless, what Hawking believes is irrelevant.

Black holes do not exist in physical reality.

"...the 'Schwarzschild singularities' do not exist in physical reality." -- Albert Einstein, 1939

What "bet"? The only reference to Hawking I've seen in your material is him being tangentially refered to in an article about some Indian guy.

Guess what? Einstein's not infalible, and 1939 is a long time ago.

 

[tansy]

OK, seeing as this thread's weaving about slightly, let me just ask another question.
Assuming the Big Bang theory is correct, what if there were several, or lots of Big Bangs, creating more than one universe.....wouldnt that have an interesting or modifying effect, as each universe bumps about off the others etc? Could something like that solve (potentially), some of the difficulties presented in current BB theory? I mean it would be bound, I should have thought, to have a knock-on effect.

 

[Chesterton]

Could something like that solve (potentially), some of the difficulties presented in current BB theory? I mean it would be bound, I should have thought, to have a knock-on effect.

Speculating about other universes is speculating about other realities. It's not science, it's fiction and fantasy; you could make it whatever you imagine. You can imagine it to solve difficulties, or not. You could imagine scenarios where it has an effect, and scenarios where it doesn't. You might as well ask about the price of tea in Narnia.

 

[Spacewyrm]

Speculating about other universes is speculating about other realities. It's not science, it's fiction and fantasy; you could make it whatever you imagine. You can imagine it to solve difficulties, or not. You could imagine scenarios where it has an effect, and scenarios where it doesn't. You might as well ask about the price of tea in Narnia.

What's the harm in speculation though, as long as it's acknowledged as such? Speculation may lead to interesting hypotheses; maybe those can be tested one day? Depending on what one means by "another universe" it might indeed be possible to detect the existence of such a thing, though nobody really knows how such a thing could be possible right now. It's at least interesting to think about.

 

[Chesterton]

What's the harm in speculation though, as long as it's acknowledged as such?

I didn't say it was harmful, I just said it wasn't science.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

What "bet"?

LOL.

The one you're deliberately ignoring.

The bet that Stephen Hawking lost concerning the existence of black holes.

Guess what? Einstein's not infalible, and 1939 is a long time ago.

I agree General Relativity is a pre-Space Age 20th century myth.

"Einstein’s theory of gravity is the craziest explanation of the phenomenon imaginable." -- Wallace Thornhill, physicist, 2001

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Assuming the Big Bang theory is correct

Why would you assume that? Because you don't believe in evidence, observation, and the scientific method?

what if there were several, or lots of Big Bangs, creating more than one universe.....wouldnt that have an interesting or modifying effect, as each universe bumps about off the others etc? Could something like that solve (potentially), some of the difficulties presented in current BB theory? I mean it would be bound, I should have thought, to have a knock-on effect.

What if God doesn't exist and it's turtles all the way down?

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Speculating about other universes is speculating about other realities. It's not science, it's fiction and fantasy; you could make it whatever you imagine. You can imagine it to solve difficulties, or not. You could imagine scenarios where it has an effect, and scenarios where it doesn't. You might as well ask about the price of tea in Narnia.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

What's the harm in speculation though, as long as it's acknowledged as such? Speculation may lead to interesting hypotheses; maybe those can be tested one day? Depending on what one means by "another universe" it might indeed be possible to detect the existence of such a thing, though nobody really knows how such a thing could be possible right now. It's at least interesting to think about.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

I didn't say it was harmful, I just said it wasn't science.

Depends on how you define science.

If you define science as certain truth then you're right.

But if you define science in the broader sense then science is indeed involved in the business of speculation.

Scientific speculations are called hypotheses and theories.

"In physics as ordinarily set forth, there is much that is unverifiable: there are hypotheses as to (A) how things would appear to a spectator in a place where, as it happens, there is no spectator; (B) how things would appear to a spectator in a place when, in fact, they are not appearing to anyone; (C) things which never appear at all." -- Bertrand Russell, Our Knowledge of the External World, 1914

 

[tansy]

Why would you assume that? Because you don't believe in evidence, observation, and the scientific method?

What if God doesn't exist and it's turtles all the way down?

Eeeeeeek!!!!!! This thread is just gettin' too confusing lol

Oh, and if God doesnt exist and it's turtles all the way down, then Christians (and others) will have believed in vain...but, of course, interesting to speculate

 

[LightHorseman]

LOL.

The one you're deliberately ignoring.

The bet that Stephen Hawking lost concerning the existence of black holes.

Then show me a citation so I can go and find out more about said bet?

I agree General Relativity is a pre-Space Age 20th century myth.

"Einstein’s theory of gravity is the craziest explanation of the phenomenon imaginable." -- Wallace Thornhill, physicist, 2001

And yet you think he's got it right about black holes? Consistency much?

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Then show me a citation so I can go and find out more about said bet?

See customarily ignored citations posted above.

And yet you think he's got it right about black holes?

Correct.

Consistency much?

Wrong about gravitation and General Relativity; right about black holes. What's inconsistent about that?