Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Well, if God is quantum mechanics, then we don't need the word "God" since we already have the math in place for quantum mechanics.
Nothing, as long as he can show QM directly points to God and God directly points at QM.
If someone else can also assume, QM points at Zeus, the flying spaghetti monster or aliens, he hasn't really objectively shown anything, except assuming something.
Well, if God is quantum mechanics, then we don't need the word "God" since we already have the math in place for quantum mechanics.
If God and QM are the same thing, it's meaningless to ask that one point to the other, just like it's pointless to say the word "bat" in Japanese and in English each point to one another. They don't point to one another because they're just words; both words stand for the same thing, and that's the point.
Zeus, FSM are both unfair comparisons, given that people believe that they're already fictional, which means assuming God is fictional too. Aliens is different, and more fair IMO given the fuzzy evidence for aliens, but within severe restrictions.
Which is a problem inherent with getting too deep with science at an abstract level, not Usus per se. Lack of predictability just means he's theorizing and philosophizing, but the road can't help but go down this way given the nature of the road.
If God and QM are the same thing,
a.) If you are going to use scientific ideas, then your gobbledygook needs to bear some relation to how those ideas are used by scientists. Otherwise, it is not philosophy; it is pretentious twaddle.
Do you think F=ma and God are the same thing?
No?
Then how come the Schrodinger Wave Equation and God are the same thing?
My point is, how would one know, God and QM are the same thing?
Why is no one seeing the distinction I am making. "QM" is not "God"
If the universe is like the body of a man: QM are the bones (Holy Spirit), the skin is God the Father, and the heart is God the Son.
The heart is the center of electromagnetism for the body, or conduction for the body whole.
The QM field is 1 of 3 distinct, structural, mutually dependent relationships formed simultaneously at the beginning of the universe.
Fine, tie it all together using legit science, that will specifically support your idea and doesn't give a multitude of other possible options.
My point is, how would one know, God and QM are the same thing?
a.) If you are going to use scientific ideas, then your gobbledygook needs to bear some relation to how those ideas are used by scientists. Otherwise, it is not philosophy; it is pretentious twaddle.
a.) If you are going to use scientific ideas, then your gobbledygook needs to bear some relation to how those ideas are used by scientists. Otherwise, it is not philosophy; it is pretentious twaddle.
Why is no one seeing the functional distinctions I am making. "QM" is not "God"
If the universe is like the body of a man: QM are the bones (Holy Spirit), the skin is God the Father, and the heart is God the Son. The heart is the center of electromagnetism for the body, or conduction for the body whole.
GOD spread Himself apart to create/become these specific relationships and singular structures. Boundary conditions.
The QM field is 1 of 3 distinct, structural, mutually dependent relationships formed simultaneously at the beginning of the universe.
What a load of......... words fail me.
Twaddle with knobs on!
This is what I'm talking about when I say drop the science. Eternal now? I'm no physics major and I can find problems in that. Namely, you've got god doing stuff...like creating universes. So even with just that one change/event....we can describe a linear time movement starting before he created the universe, going to when he created the universe, and ending after he created the universe. They can't all be the same "now".
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?