Finding limitations in Naturalism

[kellhus]

It's a current carrying structure and it's structured like a brain. You're one to talk. You can't even *see* your invisible bunnies in the sky.

Why do I have the horrifying premonition that you think the brain actually carries current as if it's a bunch of copper wire?

 

[Loudmouth]

Ya, and all of your so called observational "evidence" went up in smoke in the Planck data set.

Another lie.

Redshift is still there. Time dilation in distant supernovae are still there. All of the evidence points to expansion.

Worse yet, you never showed any empirical cause/effect justification for claiming that your invisible friends even exist, let alone that they have any influence on even one single photon.

All lies. Plenty of evidence has been given.

 

[Michael]

Another lie.

The only lie is your assumption that your invisible friends did it. You literally have zero supporting evidence from empirical physics. You have observations of "redshift" and no connection between redshift and your invisible friends.

Redshift is still there.

Of course it's still there. It's caused by inelastic scattering and moving objects, both of which occur/exist in space.

Time dilation in distant supernovae are still there.

Nope. All we observe is signal broadening from distant supernova. You've never demonstrated that *signal broadening* is in any way related to "time dilation".

All of the evidence points to expansion.

Nope. All of it points to inelastic scattering and moving objects. None of it points us to your mythical menagerie of invisible particles and energy.

All lies. Plenty of evidence has been given.

Nothing like going personal because Planck ruined all your claims. Nothing like cherry picking your favorite data from that data set while ignoring that giant problem you now have with hemispheric differences in that data set that shouldn't be there. There's no way to falsify your claims because you just make up new ad hoc entities to fill in the gaps and "fix" your falsified model. Most recently we seem to be hearing about 'curvatons' to explain all those "anomalies" in that Planck data set that you never "predicted".

 

[Loudmouth]

Why do I have the horrifying premonition that you think the brain actually carries current as if it's a bunch of copper wire?

Indeed. I am guessing that the large structures that Michael is pointing to do not participate in phosphobilipid membrane depolarization and gated protein channels.

 

[Michael]

Why do I have the horrifying premonition that you think the brain actually carries current as if it's a bunch of copper wire?

Are you actually suggesting that the brain carries no current and/or it contains no conductive elements?

 

[Loudmouth]

The only lie is your assumption that your invisible friends did it.

The redshift is evidence that they did. The redshift makes them visible.

[qutoe] You have observations of "redshift" and no connection between redshift and your invisible friends.[/quote]

Yes, we do. Expansion causes redshift. We observe redshift.

It doesn't get more simple than this.

Of course it's still there. It's caused by inelastic scattering and moving objects, both of which occur/exist in space.

You have already been told why this doesn't work. Why do you continue to ignore it?

Nothing like going personal because Planck ruined all your claims.

Another lie.

There's no way to falsify your claims because you just make up new ad hoc entities to fill in the gaps,

I laid out multiple ways in which it could be falsified. You are lying once again. First, show that there is no time dilation effects in highly redshifted supernovae. Second, show that redshift does not correlate with distance. Those are just two. I can name more.

 

[kellhus]

Are you actually suggesting that the brain carries no current and/or it contains no conductive elements?

Do you understand that myelin isn't all that conductive?

 

[Loudmouth]

Are you actually suggesting that the brain carries no current

It doesn't. Do you know what a nerve impulse is?

 

[Michael]

Brains don't carry currents.

Baloney.

Neuron - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A neuron (/ˈnjʊərɒn/ NYEWR-on or /ˈnʊərɒn/ NEWR-on; also known as a neurone or nerve cell) is an electrically excitable cell that processes and transmits information through electrical and chemical signals.

Do you even know what a nerve impulse is?

Apparently better than you do.

It has been seen for decades now. Please catch up.

Baloney again. Your SUSY particles were a complete dud in the lab. Your mythical forms of energy have zero effect on any photon in any lab on Earth.

 

[kellhus]

Baloney.

Neuron - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Apparently better than you do.

Baloney again. Your SUSY particles were a complete dud in the lab. Your mythical forms of energy have zero effect on any photon in any lab on Earth.

Well, at least we've confirmed that Michael hasn't the faintest clue how neurons actually work.

 

[Michael]

It doesn't. Do you know what a nerve impulse is?

I know that without electrical signals cruising through your spinal cord, you wouldn't even feel pain from any nerve in the rest of your body. You have no idea what you're even talking about.

 

[Michael]

Well, at least we've confirmed that Michael hasn't the faintest clue how neurons actually work.

When you get it to "work" without the flow of electrons, you let me know.

 

[kellhus]

When you get it to "work" without the flow of electrons, you let me know.

Voltage gating, action potentials, nodes of Ranvier? None of this rings a bell? Maybe you could have taken a basic physiology or neuroscience course before presuming to pontificate on something you don't have any familiarity with.

 

[Michael]

All neurons are electrically excitable, maintaining voltage gradients across their membranes by means of metabolically driven ion pumps, which combine with ion channels embedded in the membrane to generate intracellular-versus-extracellular concentration differences of ions such as sodium, potassium, chloride, and calcium. Changes in the cross-membrane voltage can alter the function of voltage-dependent ion channels. If the voltage changes by a large enough amount, an all-or-none electrochemical pulse called an action potential is generated, which travels rapidly along the cell's axon, and activates synaptic connections with other cells when it arrives.

You really cannot believe that a brain functions without electrical activity.

 

[Loudmouth]

All neurons are electrically excitable, maintaining voltage gradients across their membranes by means of metabolically driven ion pumps, which combine with ion channels embedded in the membrane to generate intracellular-versus-extracellular concentration differences of ions such as sodium, potassium, chloride, and calcium. Changes in the cross-membrane voltage can alter the function of voltage-dependent ion channels. If the voltage changes by a large enough amount, an all-or-none electrochemical pulse called an action potential is generated, which travels rapidly along the cell's axon, and activates synaptic connections with other cells when it arrives.

The pulse is an action potential, not a current. There is no current along a conductor, only the movement of ions through gated protein channels. This is completely unlike currents along wires or the structures you are pointing to. You are seeing bunnies in clouds.

 

[Michael]

Voltage gating, action potentials, nodes of Ranvier? None of this rings a bell? Maybe you could have taken a basic physiology or neuroscience course before presuming to pontificate on something you don't have any familiarity with.

Voltage gating? How did you intend to claim that it's not an electrically active process if it involves voltage gating?

 

[kellhus]

Voltage gating? How did you intend to claim that it's not an electrically active process if it involves voltage gating?

Nobody said it wasn't electrical. Pay attention.

 

[Michael]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage-gated_ion_channel

From crystallographic structural studies of a potassium channel, assuming that this structure remains intact in the corresponding plasma membrane, it is possible to surmise that when a potential difference is introduced over the membrane, the associated electromagnetic field induces a conformational change in the potassium channel. The conformational change distorts the shape of the channel proteins sufficiently such that the cavity, or channel, opens to admit ion influx or efflux to occur across the membrane, down its electrochemical gradient. This subsequently generates an electrical current sufficient to depolarise the cell membrane.

Why do they discuss current? Get real.

 

[Loudmouth]

Voltage gating? How did you intend to claim that it's not an electrically active process if it involves voltage gating?

It involves a change in the physical shape of the protein that allows entire charged atoms to move across a concentration gradient. In a wire, do you send sodium ions from one end to the other, or do you send electrons?

The speed of a nerve impulse is 100 m/s, well below the ~3E8 m/s for an electrical current.

 

[Loudmouth]

Why do they discuss current? Are you even for real?

Why does a nerve impulse travel at 100 m/s, well below what an electrical current travels at?